Crisp, Courtemanche, Meador & Associates v. Medler

• Decision Date: 15 March 1983
• Docket Number: No. 57511,No. 2,57511,2
• Citation: 1983 OK CIV APP 11,663 P.2d 388
• Parties: 1983 OK CIV APP 11 CRISP, COURTEMANCHE, MEADOR & ASSOCIATES, a partnership, Appellee, v. Elma MEDLER, Appellant
• Court: United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma

Page 388

663 P.2d 388

1983 OK CIV APP 11

CRISP, COURTEMANCHE, MEADOR & ASSOCIATES, a partnership, Appellee, v.Elma MEDLER, Appellant.

No. 57511.

Court of Appeals of Oklahoma Division No. 2.

March 15, 1983.

Released for Publication by Order of

Court of Appeals May 19, 1983.

Appeal from the District Court, Oklahoma County; Homer Smith, Trial judge.

Action brought to recover on open account.Debtor appeals from order sustaining motion for summary judgment.

AFFIRMED.

Elma Medler, pro se.

Kevin Blaney and Lisa RabinMcKenzie Eagleton, Nicholson, Jones & Blaney Oklahoma City, for appellee.

BOYDSTON, Judge.

Client Elma Medler appeals from summary judgment granted in favor of Crisp, Courtemanche, Meador and Associates, a court reporter partnership (Reporter) for services rendered in preparing a transcript.Medler appeals on the sole ground that the case was not ripe for summary judgment.Based on our review of the record, we disagree with Medler and affirm the decision below.

When summary judgment has been granted, the appellate court is required to examine the pleadings and evidentiary materials.If the record discloses either controverted material facts or if the uncontroverted facts support legitimate inferences favoring the well-pled theory of the party against whom the judgment is granted, the judgment will be reversed.Northrip v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Okl., 529 P.2d 489(1974);Runyon v. Reid, Okl., 510 P.2d 943(1973);District CourtRule 13, 12 O.S.1981, Ch. 2, App.¹

The operative facts in this appeal are not in serious dispute.Mr. Larry Turner and Ms. Medler, his mother, were convicted of a crime in federal court.Their trial attorney withdrew from the case, and they then hired Robert Pittman(Attorney) to lodge the appeal.There is some dispute as to whether Attorney filed an appeal for both parties or just one of them.However, it is clear that the parties had a community of interest as mother and son, codefendants and parties with a vital interest in the outcome of the appeal.The record shows it was decided to appeal only Turner's conviction because of the similarity of grounds for reversal; i.e., reversal of one would amount to reversal of the other.Medler paid the initial $1,000 deposit to Attorney who then paid it to Reporter.The final bill was $2,816, which was never paid and forms the basis for this suit.

The evidence in this case includes: (1)motions for summary judgment, (2) affidavits, (3) interrogatories, (4) Attorney's deposition, and (5) other documents including a form from the federal criminal case file that declared Attorney was the attorney of record for both clients.

In affidavits and answers to interrogatories, Ms. Medler first admitted that Attorney had represented her at the critical time, but later denied it.To put it simply, Medler's defense was that by ordering the entire transcript Attorney had exceeded his authority, because it had been agreed the testimony of a single witness was the only part of the transcript necessary for appeal.

Reporter offered evidence that Attorney represented Medler at the time the transcript was designated and that they had performed the work for which payment was refused.This proof was substantiated by Attorney's deposition in which he denied exceeding his authority.

First we observe that the attorney client relationship is one of agency.SeeMoran v. Loeffler-Greene Supply Co., Okl., 316 P.2d 132(1957).As such, an attorney is empowered with real and apparent authority to bind a client within the scope of the employment, absent proof...