Patel v. Wagha

Record contained sufficient evidence to support jury’s verdict in favor of plaintiff in action alleging that defendant-investment firm breached contract to invest plaintiff’s money conservatively and engaged in fraud, where plaintiff’s investment portfolio declined in value because defendant chose to invest much of plaintiff’s money in high risk options. One kind of fraud under Rule 10b-5b concerns procuring securities known to be unsuitable to client’s investment goals, after promising to further those goals, and record showed that defendant’s purchase of instant options caused plaintiff loss in sense that options, as highly leveraged financial instruments, fared materially worse than safer instruments such as diversified stock portfolio. Ct. rejected defendant’s claim that plaintiff had agreed to have defendant invest in instant options, and jury could look to plaintiff’s oral directions to defendant to identify plaintiff’s investment objectives and goals.