Opinion ID: 2074116
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: j. ireland case.

Text: H.J. Ireland, an employe of the Burlington, was injured on June 30, 1942. It appears from the record that he first met respondent when the latter called at the Lincoln General Hospital to see him with one William Barnett, whom Ireland knew. Barnett's father-in-law was in the hospital about the same time that Ireland was there, and when Barnett learned that Ireland was in the hospital he came to see him at various times. They discussed Ireland's case, and Barnett asked him if the railroad company had ever inquired about a settlement, and the latter replied,    I said no, I hadn't even been able to get hold of Parmelee [railroad claim agent],   . When Ireland was asked if he had requested Barnett to bring respondent to the hospital, he said, Yes, I did.    I said I would like to talk to him. He reiterated this when asked, You also state that you asked Mr. Barnett to get in touch with Mr. Rerat, and have him come to see you? and replied, That's right, I did. It further appears that after a conference with Ireland respondent told him that he did not think the latter's injuries were serious, that the case was one of doubtful liability, and respondent advised Ireland to make a settlement directly with the railroad company. Ireland followed this advice, made a settlement with the company, and returned to work. The referee found that respondent never acted as Ireland's attorney and never received any compensation, and that the evidence was insufficient to justify a finding of solicitation. We believe from a review of Ireland's deposition and respondent's testimony that the referee was justified in finding that there was no solicitation on the part of respondent in this case.