Roach v. Mead
Supreme Court of Oregon
722 P.2d 1229 (1986)
Berentson and Mead (defendants) were partners in a law firm. Mead represented Roach (plaintiff) on several occasions. When Roach asked Mead’s advice on investing the proceeds of a business sale, Mead told Roach he would take the money at 15 percent interest. Roach testified that he considered this to be legal advice, and he gave Mead $20,000. Mead did not repay any of the money, and Roach sued Mead’s partnership for negligence. Berentson moved for a directed verdict, arguing that he was not vicariously liable for Mead’s negligent acts because they were outside the scope of the partnership’s business. The trial court denied the motion. The jury found Berentson vicariously liable for Mead’s negligence, and the court of appeals affirmed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)