Bob Godfrey Pontiac, Inc. v. Roloff
Oregon Supreme Court
630 P.2d 840 (1981)
- Written by Meagan Anglin, JD
Facts
Bob Godfrey Pontiac, Inc. (Godfrey Pontiac) (plaintiff) had previously sued a used-car buyer. That buyer was represented by Larry Roloff and Douglas Melevin (defendants). After Godfrey Pontiac lost in the initial trial, it brought suit against Roloff and Melevin, claiming Roloff and Melevin violated their statutory duty not to mislead the court and jury by false statements of fact. Godfrey Pontiac sought to recover for damage to its reputation and attorney’s fees from the previous action. The attorneys filed a demurrer, and the trial court sustained the demurrer. Godfrey Pontiac appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals, arguing that the violation of a statutory duty should give rise to a claim for relief by the damaged party. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Tongue, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.