3.1. Lew owns a store on Canal Street in New Orleans. He paid a 4. Read the case. person named Mike and other individuals commissions for customers brought into the store. Lew testified that he had known 5. Provide a five- Mike for less than a week. Boulos and Durso, partners in a sentence paragraph (Le, in wholesale jewelry business, were visiting New Orleans on a the section for business trip when Mike brought them into the store to buy a "Purport") that stereo. While Durso finalized the stereo transaction with the interprets the store's manager, Boulos and Mike negotiated to buy 2 cameras, 3 theme of the case videos, and 20 gold Dupont lighters. Unknown to the store's to include manager, Mike was given $8,250 in cash and was to deliver the (a) identifying the merchandise later that evening to the Marriott Hotel, where legal Boulos and Durso were staying. Mike gave a receipt for the cash, classification of this transaction; but it showed no sales tax or indication that the goods were to be (b) the legal status delivered. Boulos testified that he believed Mike was the store of the people in owner. Mike never delivered the merchandise and disappeared. the case, (c) Boulos and Durso contended that Lew is liable for the acts of his mention of the agent. Mike. Lew denied that Mike was his agent, and the Chapter with testimony showed that Mike had no actual authority to make a which your sale, to use a cash register, or even to go behind a sales counter. interpretation is associated (Hint: [Boulos v. Morrison, 503 So. 2d 1 (La.)] Chapters 11, 20, 3.2. Purport 36, or 40). 9. In at least three sentences, answer the questions. Make sure you justify your 3.3. Question 1: Who in Boulos v. Morrison can be answers with considered as an agent? learned concepts of law. 3.4. Question 2: Who in Boulos v. Morrison can be considered as a principal