This Article examines the issues raised by the case Washington v. Sturridge (2021) in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. The case itself was well-noted among contemporary news media sources. These sources were not interested in the case’s potential landmark status or revolutionary judgments, but rather the celebrity status of the litigants. The defendant, Daniel Sturridge, is perhaps best known as a once high-profile footballer with a career as a prolific goal scorer and now as social media influencer. The claimant is an American rapper, who performs under the name Killa Fame. The facts of the case will, however, be familiar to all law students as they are typical of a classic reward promise case, also known as a unilateral contract. There is a nuanced difference between these nomenclatures of contract and promise in this factual matrix. The distinctiveness of the case under discussion is threefold. First, the case shows how a resolution to a relatively simple issue requires a common law solution constructed from three jurisdictions (England, the United States and Australia) to resolve it. Second, it shows how technological developments are absorbed into the common law and accommodated. Third, it demonstrates the enduring importance of context and social relations to contract law and common law.