Grayson v. Jones, 16140

• Decision Date: 12 December 1985
• Docket Number: No. 16140,16140
• Citation: 710 P.2d 76,101 Nev. 749
• Parties: John Wesley GRAYSON, Jr., M.D., individually and as Trustee of the Grayson Trust, Appellant, v. Clifford A. JONES, Herbert M. Jones, Thomas G. Bell, Melvin D. Close aka Melvin D. Close, Jr., and Joseph W. Brown, Respondent.
• Court: Nevada Supreme Court

Page 76

710 P.2d 76

101 Nev. 749

John Wesley GRAYSON, Jr., M.D., individually and as Trustee of the Grayson Trust, Appellant, v. Clifford A. JONES, Herbert M. Jones, Thomas G. Bell, Melvin D. Close aka Melvin D. Close, Jr., and Joseph W Brown, Respondent.

No. 16140.

Supreme Court of Nevada.

Dec. 12, 1985.

Johns & Johns, Las Vegas, for appellant.

Wright, Shinehouse & Stewart, Las Vegas, for respondent.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from summary judgment entered by the trial court in favor of respondents, Clifford A. Jones, Herbert M. Jones, Thomas G. Bell, Melvin D. Close, and Joseph W. Brown. The trial court found that there was no genuine issue of material fact and that respondents were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. We conclude that the trial court was correct; accordingly, we affirm the summary judgment.

Respondents are directors, officers, shareholders, and employees of the professional legal corporation Jones, Jones, Close & Brown, Chartered. ¹ Appellant, Dr. Grayson, has alleged that Gary Goodheart, also a director, officer, shareholder, and employee of Jones, Jones, Close & Brown, was involved in a conspiracy to wrongfully terminate appellant's employment with two medical corporations, Associated Pathologists, Chartered (APC) and International Progress Modalities (IPM). Goodheart was counsel for both APC and IPM during all times relevant to appellant's complaint. Appellant seeks to hold respondents personally liable for any wrongful acts of Goodheart.

A member of professional legal corporation in Nevada is not individually liable for the tortious acts of other members of that professional legal corporation unless he/she personally participated in those tortious acts. See NRS 89.060. ² Thus, it is clear that, as a matter of law, respondents cannot be held individually liable for the alleged tortious acts of Goodheart unless they personally participated in those acts.

Respondents are entitled to judgment if there exists no genuine issue as to the fact of their personal participation in the acts of Goodheart. See Nevada Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). It is true that in evaluating the propriety of a grant of summary judgment, we must "review the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary judgment was rendered," Servaites v. Lowden, 99 Nev. 240, 244, 660 P.2d 1008 (1983); however, appellant must allege "specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Rule 56(e). (Emphasis added.)

Appellant's affidavits do not allege any facts showing that respondents personally participated in the alleged tortious acts of Goodheart. Respondents state in their affidavits that they did not personally participate...