|
Do you have doubts left about what I've said? Then judge for yourself if
what I've said is accurate and if this trial was as rigged as the other ones
were. To help you make your decision here's the entire agreement between Art
James and myself and the judge’s decision.
AGREEMENT
This agreement, signed this 23rd day of September 1982, between Arthur F.
James, hereinafter called "Debtor"; and Donald E. Iiams, Jr.
hereinafter called "Creditor";
WHEREAS, the parties have disagreement regarding the representation of the
Creditor by the Debtor, and
WHEREAS, the parties have reached an agreement with regard to their
disputes, the parties agree as follows:
1. The Debtor agrees to pay to the Creditor a settlement of the above
mentioned dispute the sum of Forty thousand Dollars ($40,000.00) within three
(3) years from the signing of this agreement;
2. That the Debtor further agrees to pay to the Creditor the sum of One
Thousand Four Hundred Forty Six Dollars and Ninety Cents ($1,446.90) at the
rate of 18% per year within sixty (60) days from the signing of this agreement,
secured by law books as inventory of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
3. That the Creditor agrees to forego suing the Debtor for any and all
claims arising out of his representation of the Creditor heretofore; and
4. That the Debtor hereby waives his defense of untimely filing due to any
applicable statute of limitations on the claims by the Creditor against the
Debtor until the payment of Forty Thousand Dollars (40,000.00) as set forth in
the body of this agreement and
5. That it is further agreed that this note shall bear interest from the
date of its signing of this agreement at the rate of Eighteen (18) percent per
annum until paid in full; and
6. that the Creditor further agrees to accept the payment of Thirty Thousand
Dollars ($30,000.00) plus interest at the rate of Eighteen (18) percent per
annum as satisfaction of this note if that amount is paid within one (1) year
from the date of the signing of this agreement.
7. The Debtor further agrees to release any and all claims he has against
the Creditor for any sums due the Debtor from the Creditor or any suits the
Creditor owes for which the Debtor has acted as a surety as of this date.
8. The Debtor further agrees to notify Columbia Gas of Ohio of the
Creditor's interest in Roger Williams' claim against Columbia Gas of Ohio in
the amount of Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000.00); and agrees to maintain
Dennis P. Strong as counsel of record on that claim through its negotiation and
for eventual suit through its conclusion and the name of Dennis P. Strong is to
be included on any settlement check or draft to Roger Williams; and that the
said notification will take place on the date of this Agreement.
9. The Debtor, Art James, agrees to hold the creditor harmless on the case
Fondessey Brothers vs. Donald E. Iiams, Jr. filed in 1978 in Toledo Municipal
Court. Default judgement has been entered in that case and the debtor will hold
the creditor harmless if in fact execution on that default judgement is made.
10. Failure of the debtor of any of the conditions of this Agreement shall
make the $40,000.00 become due and payable at the time of the breach.
11. This is the entire agreement.
Art James and I both signed the agreement with Dennis and some other person
witnessing it.
Here is the judge’s decision.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LUCAS COUNTY, OHIO Case No.86-2499
DECISION & ENTRY
Donald E. Iiams, Jr.: Plaintiff
vs.
Arthur James: Defendant
The within action was commenced on an agreement entered into by Plaintiff
and Defendant on September 23, 1982, by which Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff
$41,446.90 plus 18% interest and Plaintiff agreed to forbear from prosecuting
criminal, ethical and civil malpractice claims arising out of a client-attorney
relationship that had previously existed between the parties.
From the evidence, it appears that Defendant has paid on the agreement
$39,780.20 in an untimely manner; Plaintiff claims damages in the amount of
$60,000.00 plus interest and costs.
The record reflects that Defendant represented Plaintiff in Iiams v.
Cleveland Metal Abrasives, Inc., Case No. C-77-78, in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Western Division. It appears
that Plaintiff was awarded a money judgement with which he was unsatisfied. The
Defendant prosecuted an appeal, but he failed to file a brief. Defendants
therein prosecuted a cross-appeal, Defendants therein made several efforts to
settle and resolve the matter by payment of money. Plaintiff therein wanted job
reinstatement, and therefore he rejected all settlement offers. The Sixth
Circuit Court of Appeals modified the judgement of the trial court and reduced
it to $1,446.90 because of Plaintiff's failure to mitigate damages. When
Defendant herein received the check in settlement he negotiated it and applied
it against attorney's fees owed him by Plaintiff. Upon discovery of the
circumstances, Plaintiff sought criminal prosecution and disciplinary action.
Police investigation apparently established express or implied authority for
Defendant to negotiate the check. The Toledo Bar Association informed Plaintiff
that he should reduce his complaint to writing. thereafter, the within
settlement was reached regarding the Cleveland Metal Abrasives, Inc. case and
other matters.
|