Bickel v. Whitacre

Ohio Court of Appeals

Bickel v. Whitacre

29 Ohio Law. Abs. 256, 1939 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1161

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 30, 1939

DocketNo 5558

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 29 Ohio Law. Abs. 256 (Bickel v. Whitacre) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bickel v. Whitacre, 29 Ohio Law. Abs. 256, 1939 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1161 (Ohio Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

An examination of the petition indicates that the plaintiff sought to state a cause of action against the defendant Whitacre as a Justice of the Peace. The evidence, however, clearly develops that the employment of Whitacre was as an attorney. The cause of action against him as such would expire in one year from the acts constituting malpractice. Such time had expired before instituting the suit.

The judgment of the trial court is correct, and the same is affirmed.

ROSS, PJ, HAMILTON & MATTHEWS, JJ, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI