Read the Time Limited Group Assignment case problem on page 374. The issue is whether Fontenot and the four other people were engaged in a partnership.

Based on the Court's discussion in Harun v. Rashid, on page 359, explain how would a court would apply the essential elements of a partnership to these facts to determine whether Stafford Fontenot and the four others were engaged in a partnership when the promissory notes were signed, onJune 12.

Assume that a partnership did exist on June 12 and that the lawsuit was filed against the partnership, not just Fontenot. Fontenot and 3 of the partners are insolvent, but the 4^th partner, Joan Cameron, has personal resources. Cameron claims that she cannot be held liable for this debt because she did not sign the promissory notes and did not even know about the debt until after Fontenot had signed the notes. Explain whether a court will find this to be a persuasive argument, and identify the most likely outcome.

Finally, assume that these parties had formed a corporation prior to June 12. The corporation has been sued for nonpayment of the note. Fontenot and 3 of the members are insolvent, but the 4^th member, Joan Cameron, has personal resources. For how much of the $32,000 is Cameron liable? Explain.