Weller, a businessman in Coalinga, hired certified public accountant Eyman to install a system at bookkeeping and prepare his current year income tax return, While doing this, Eyman examined Weller's

Weller, a businessman in Coalinga, hired certified public accountant Eyman to install a system at bookkeeping and prepare his current year income tax return, While doing this, Eyman examined Weller's returns for the previous few years and, with Weller's approval, filed amended returns for the previous years claiming a refund of $4,800. As a result of the refund claim, the treasury department reviewed the returns and gave notice of an-additional assessment of $118,000. Eyman agreed to handle the matter for a $1,000 retainer. On a Saturday afternoon, 2 days before the time for filing a protest on the large assessment was set to expire, Eyman required that Weller sign a contract paying the accountant a contingency fee for handling the matter, and was told that unless it was signed he would not file the protest and the client would be liable for the $118,000 assessment. The contingency fee was in addition to the $1,000 retainer. Weller signed the contingency agreement because there was not time for him to prepare a protest, as it had taken a couple of months for Eyman to do it. In addition, he would be subject to financial ruin if he had to pay the assessment. Did Eyman's conduct result in economic duress? Explain and argue legally BOTH sides. Review, and critique a minimum of 2 of your classmates' legal analysis and respond to them through discussion thread.