Legal Opinion
Roach v. Mead
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided July 29, 1986No. CC A8303-01681; CA A32821; SC S32368; S32382PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
The issues in this case are: (1) Is the partner of an attorney who negligently advises a client vicariously liable to the client for damages? (2) Does Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA), ORS 646.605 to 646.652, apply to the actions of defendant’s partner, thus entitling plaintiff to attorney fees?
At trial, defendant, David J. Berentson, moved for a directed verdict, contending that he was not vicariously liable for the negligent acts of his partner, Kenneth E. Mead, because the negligent acts were outside the scope of the partnership’s business. Defendant also moved for a directed…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Wheeler v. GreenOregon Supreme Court · 1979
- Myers v. Cessna Aircraft CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Krause v. Eugene Dodge, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Jacobs v. Tidewater Barge Lines, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
- Shepler v. Weyerhaeuser Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Olson v. FraaseNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
- Tenold v. Weyerhaeuser Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- Beyers v. RichmondSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Cullen v. Investment Strategies, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- Northwest Natural Gas Co. v. Chase Gardens, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.