Harold and Maude were walking down a country road when they were frightened by a steer running loose on the road. They climbed over a fence to get onto the adjacent property, which was owned by Farmer. After climbing over the fence, Harold and Maude damaged some of farmer's crops which were growing near the fence, which was posted with a large "No Trespassing" sign. Farmer saw Harold and Maude and came toward them with his large watchdog on a long leash. The dog ran toward Maude. Farmer had only intended to frighten Harold and Maude, but the leash broke and the dog bit Maude. If Maude files a claim in battery against Farmer, will she prevail?

a. No, because Maude made an unauthorized entry onto Farmer's land.
b. No, because Farmer did not intend to cause any harmful contact with Maude.
c. Yes, because Farmer intended for the dog to frighten Maude.
d. Yes, because the breaking of the leash establishes liability under res ipsa loquitur.