[t]he defendant styles herself 'a creator of fashions,'" and his description of what she designed as" fabrics, parasols and what not." Id. at 214. See Mary Joe Frug, Re-reading Contracts: A Feminist Analysis of a Casebook, 34 AM. U. L. REV. 1065,1084 (1985). Whatever Cardozo may have thought of women's fashions, his inference seems the only possible conclusion about this very shrewd business woman. See Walter F. Pratt, Jr., American Contract Law at the Turn of the Century, 39 S.C.L. REV. 415 (1988). [For more sympathetic views of "Lucille," see in this symposium, Larry A. DiMatteo, Cardozo, Anti-Formalism, and the Fiction of Noninterventionism, 28 PACE L. REV. 315 (2008).] If he had considered women's fashions too trivial for the courts he would have found the contract unenforceable,which is what Lucy wanted.