Nichols v. Poulson
Ohio Supreme Court
In the common pleas the defendant in error filed his declaration in assumpsit for services rendered as a physician, and for board, for work and labor; for goods, wares, and merchandise; for money laid out and expended, and for money *had and [306 received, etc. To this declaration the plaintiff in error filed his plea of the general issue, with a notice of set-off. The cause was tried to a jury, and a verdict and judgment for the defendant in error.
Read the full summary
In the common pleas the defendant in error filed his declaration in assumpsit for services rendered as a physician, and for board, for work and labor; for goods, wares, and merchandise; for money laid out and expended, and for money *had and [306 received, etc. To this declaration the plaintiff in error filed his plea of the general issue, with a notice of set-off. The cause was tried to a jury, and a verdict and judgment for the defendant in error. And the trial further progressing to the jury in the common pleas, the bill of exceptions shows that the services rendered by the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the Court
The repeal of section 11 of the act incorporating medical societies, of February 26, 1824, making all contracts for services as a physician, not licensed, valid, does not revive the contract, and enable the plaintiff to recover for such services, after the repeal; such services being performed during the existence of the law.
This cause was reserved in the county of Pickaway for decision in the court in bank.
Judge Wood stated the case, and delivered the opinion of the -court:
*311In this case a judgment was obtained against the plaintiff in error, by the defendant in error, before a justice of the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Cook v. PerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Estate of Kinsey v. JanesOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- Benson v. RoslerOhio Supreme Court · 1985