Ohio Supreme Court June 9, 1908, No. 10094 (Davy v. Fidelity & Casualty Insurance)

Davis, J.

The theory upon which this action is based is that an attorney may not only contract with his client for a contingent fee, but that he may at the same time and upon the same consideration acquire such an interest in his client’s cause of action before judgment as to prevent the latter from settling his case without consent of the attorney.