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.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 159,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,700 briefs, keyed to 186 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.