Case ID: ohio-law-abs_1/html/0669-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 674
    PRICE v. CRITCHFIELD
    Ohio Appeals, 9th District, Wayne County.
    No. 752.
    Decided May 25th, 1923.
    This opinion has not been published except in Abstract.
    45- ATTORNEYS.
    Liability of client for legal services.
    Funk, Pardee and Washburn, JJ.
    ATTORNEYS — Daniel C. Funk, for Price; Weygandt & Ross, for Critchfield.
   PER CURIAM:

Epitomized Opinion.

This was an a<tion brought b” Critchfield to recover for legal services and xpenses in connection with a suit brought by Price against the Pennsylvania Railroad. The evidence disclosed that most dUhe services were rendered as an investigator |[^Her than as an attorney. The court rendered a fragment for the plaintiff. The defendent prosecuted enor. In sustaining the judgment of the lower court, the Court of Appeals held:

1. Regardless of whether the services were rendered as an attorney or merely as an investigator the plaintiff was entitled to a judgment for the services so rendered and that substantial justice was done in the rendition of such judgment.