Summary
holding that an attorney who initially represents a client and is dismissed does not have a quantum meruit action against the attorney who ultimately settles the case
Summary of this case from Ciecka v. RosenOpinion
Argued January 24, 1994.
Decided February 15, 1994.
Appeal No. 43 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1993, from Order of Superior Court entered January 19, 1993, at No. 3410 Philadelphia 1991, Reversing Order of Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County, Civil Division, entered October 21, 1991, at No. 90/2611-17-1, 422 Pa. Super. 262, 619 A.2d 347 (1993).
David L. Styer, pro se.
Randall W. Hugo, pro se.
Before NIX, C.J., and FLAHERTY, ZAPPALA, PAPADAKOS, CAPPY, CASTILLE and MONTEMURO, JJ.
ORDER
Order affirmed.
MONTEMURO, J., is sitting by designation as Senior Justice pursuant to Judicial Assignment Docket No. 94 R1800, due to the unavailability of LARSEN, J., see No. 127 Judicial Administration Docket No. 1, filed October 28, 1993.