Lightbody v. Rust
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Kilbane, Judge.
Attorney William S. Lightbody refused to answer certain questions during his deposition taken in his suit against lawyers Charles R. Rust and Kenneth L. Mitchell, individually, and the law firm of Woodling, Krost & Rust (“Woodling”) in which he alleged a breach of a co-counsel fee agreement. Lightbody claims Judge Christopher A. Boyko erred in granting appellee Woodling’s Civ.R. 37 motion for an order compelling discovery. Lightbody challenges the judge’s conclusion that certain answers would not violate his asserted attorney-client privilege because Woodling enjoyed the same…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Nakoff v. Fairview General HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Kala v. Aluminum Smelting & Refining Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1998
- Maust v. PalmerOhio Court of Appeals · 1994
- State v. Today's Bookstore, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1993
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Huntsman v. Aultman HospitalOhio Court of Appeals · 2005
- Northeast Professional Home Care, Inc. v. Advantage Home Health Services, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2010
- Akron Bar Ass'n v. HolderOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Trangle v. RojasOhio Court of Appeals · 2002
- Ingram v. Adena Health SystemOhio Court of Appeals · 2002
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.