Case Name: STEIGER v. HAMILTON
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1935-05-27
Citations: 19 Ohio Law Abs. 596
Docket Number: No 650
Parties: STEIGER v HAMILTON
Judges: ROSS, PJ, and MATTHEWS, J, concur.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 19
Pages: 596–596

Head Matter:
STEIGER v HAMILTON
Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Butler Co
No 650.
Decided May 27, 1935
Walter P. Harlan, Hamilton, for plaintiff in error.
P. P. Boli, Hamilton, for defendant In error.

Opinion:
OPINION
By HAMILTON, J.
The evidence fully justified the court in finding, as it must have done, that the family relationship did not exist. There was also evidence from which the court could find that there was an express contract to pay the reasonable value of the services.
A reading of the bill of exceptions leads us to the conclusion that the trial court was justified in sustaining the Probate Court in the allowance of the claim, and the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.
ROSS, PJ, and MATTHEWS, J, concur.