With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Shortly after CT Miami signed that Distributor Agreement, the parties began conducting business together. They continued conducting business together for appr tr. Corp., 253 So.2d 461, 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971) (“A contract may be binding on a party despite the absence of a party’s signature. The object of a signature is to show mutuality, or assent, -but these facts may be shown in other ways, for example, by the acts or conduct of the parties.”). Additionally, “[a] contract is binding, despite the fact that one party did not sign the contract, where both parties have performed under the contract.” Integrated Health Servs. of Green Briar, Inc. v. Lopez-Silvero, 827 So.2d 338, 339 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); see also Alterra Healthcare Corp. v. Bryant, 937 So.2d 263, 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (<HOLDING>). The undisputed facts that CT Miami signed the

A: holding that parties can stipulate that they were both parties to a contract and thus the real parties in interest even when one party did not sign the contract
B: holding that a trial court correctly determined an agreement was binding despite one partys failure to sign the document where the parties performed under the terms of the contract
C: holding that a court should decide whether the arbitration contract bound parties who did not sign the agreement
D: holding that the judicial admission exception did not apply to prove the existence of an oral agreement for the sale of stock where the defendant offered his deposition testimony acknowledging that the parties agreed to have a document transferring the stocks drafted by an attorney because the defendants references to the agreement were in terms of a tentative or incomplete agreement and because any admission of such a contract would necessarily have to include a statement of the price and quantity terms
B.