Legal Opinion
Richette v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided January 21, 1963No. Appeals, Nos. 290, 298, 299 and 300PublishedCited by 84 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Musmanno,
The relationship between a lawyer and his client is a serious, vital and solemn one. No third person may interfere with that relationship any more than he may with propriety intervene between a doctor and *9his patient. A claimant or patient may, of eourse, disengage himself from a professional relationship provided he has met all obligations owing to his legal or medical counsellor, but if that disassociation is the result of coercion or misrepresentation practiced by others, the intervenors are answerable in law as anyone else would be liable for causing the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- McCarthy v. De ArmitSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881
- Peyton v. MargiottiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Klauder v. CregarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Downes v. HODINSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Caskie v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by84 opinions
- Don Chuy, in No. 77-1412 v. The Philadelphia Eagles Football Club (Sued as "The Philadelphia Eagles"), in No. 77-1411 and the National Football LeagueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Chambers v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Adler, Barish, Daniels, Levin & Creskoff v. EpsteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Phillips v. SeligSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Behrend v. Bell Telephone Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.