Solon Family Physicians, Inc. v. Buckles
Decision Date | 22 August 1994 |
Docket Number | No. 66051,66051 |
Citation | 645 N.E.2d 150,96 Ohio App.3d 460 |
Parties | SOLON FAMILY PHYSICIANS, INC., Appellee, v. BUCKLES et al.; Miller, Stillman and Bartel Co., L.P.A., Appellant. |
Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Zashin, Rich, Sutula Co., L.P.A., Andrew A. Zashin and Andrew J. Simon, Cleveland, for appellee.
Charles E. Wagner and Donald C. Price, Cleveland, for appellant.
Appellant, Miller, Stillman & Bartel Co., L.P.A., appeal from the judgment of the trial court in favor of appellee, Solon Family Physicians, Inc. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.
Appellee commenced this action on December 18, 1993 against appellant, and Jean Buckles, Willard Bartel, Charles Wagner, individually. Wagner and Bartel have been dismissed. Through this action, appellee sought to collect $1,852 for medical services rendered to Buckles. Appellee alleged that fees were incurred by Buckles and payment guaranteed by appellant, who represented her in a personal injury action.
The matter was heard before a referee in the Cleveland Municipal Court on May 28, 1993. At that hearing, the following contract was submitted:
Patient's signature "The undersigned being attorney of record for the above patient does hereby agree to observe all the terms of the above and agrees to withhold such sums from any settlement, judgement or verdict, as may be necessary to adequately protect said doctor above-named.
This contract identified Solon Family Physicians and Dr. Hillel Mazansky as the "Named" doctor.
In addition to the aforementioned contract, the following letter from Lebovitz to Dr. Mazansky, dated June 28, 1989, was introduced:
After the hearing, the referee made the following recommendations:
Timely objections were made to this report by appellant. On July 27, 1993, the trial court entered final judgment adopting the report of the referee.
This appeal timely follows.
Appellant's first assignment of error contends that:
"There existed no contract between Solon Family Physicians, Inc. and the Appellant."
Essentially, the trial court determined that appellant's letter of June 28, 1989 created a suretyship under which appellant is now liable.
Suretyship is the contractual relation whereby one person, the surety, agrees to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another, the principal with the surety generally being primarily and jointly liable with the principal. Hopkins v. INA Underwriters Ins. Co. (1988), 44 Ohio App.3d 186, 188, 542 N.E.2d 679, 682.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Water Works Supplies, Inc. v. Grooms Construction Co., Inc., 2005 Ohio 1292 (OH 3/14/2005), Case No. 04CA12.
...provision beyond the scope of the parties' intent." F&D further asserts that Galatis overruled Solon Family Physicians, Inc. v. Buckles (1994), 96 Ohio App.3d 460, 464, 645 N.E.2d 150, which held that "doubtful language in the contract of surety must be construed strongly against the surety......
-
Am. Express Travel Related Serv. Co., Inc. v. Mandilakis
...liable to a third party for negligence in connection with his representation of a client. See, e.g., Solon Family Physicians, Inc. v. Buckles (1994), 96 Ohio App.3d 460, 645 N.E.2d 150. However, Ohio courts have held that such liability only arises in cases where the third person is in priv......
-
In Re Stephen W. Colbert
...to the debtor is deemed sufficient to support the surety's promise to make the debt good.’ ” Solon Family Physicians, Inc. v. Buckles, 96 Ohio App.3d 460, 645 N.E.2d 150, 152 (1994) United States v. Tilleraas, 709 F.2d 1088, 1091 (6th Cir.1983)). In other words, “[t]he obligation of the sur......
-
Medina Supply Co. v. Corrado
...to the debtor is deemed sufficient to support the surety's promise to make the debt good.' " Solon Family Physicians, Inc. v. Buckles (1994), 96 Ohio App.3d 460, 464, 645 N.E.2d 150, 152, quoting United States v. Tilleraas (C.A.6, 1983), 709 F.2d 1088, 1091. "The obligation of the surety re......