In 2007, Tareq, who operated a business under the name Downtown Grocery, employed Marcus as a clerk in his store at a weekly salary of $450. Marcus received regular annual salary increases in the years 2008 to 2012. By 2012, he was earning $700 per week. Early in 2012, Marcus approached Tareq with a request for a further increase in his wages. Tareq refused on the basis that low business profits limited his ability to pay more than $700 per week. A lengthy discussion followed and the two parties reached the fol-lowing agreement. Marcus would receive $700 per week and, in addi-tion, would receive 20 percent of the net profits. He would continue to perform the duties of clerk, but would also assume responsibility for the meat department. He would make all management decisions concerning meat purchases and pricing. Tareq would continue to handle the general man-agement of the business. He would draw the amount of $1,000 per week and would be entitled to 80 percent of the net profits. Marcus would be permitted to examine the busi-ness account books, and he would be consulted in all major business decisions by Tareq. A few weeks after the agreement was reached, Tareq discovered that Marcus was purchasing groceries (for his personal use) at a competitor's store. In a rage, he barred Marcus from entering the store and told him that he would send him his severance pay by mail. Shortly thereafter, Marcus instituted legal pro-ceedings for a declaration that he was a partner in Downtown Grocery. Discuss the merits of the action taken by Marcus and discuss the arguments that might be raised by the parties. How would you expect the matter to be decided