
    THURSTON v. DIGGS.
    This case is governed by tlie decision of the court in Diggs v. Tlmrslon, 39 App. D. C. 267.
    No. 3036.
    Submitted November 6, 1917.
    Decided December 3, 1917.
    Hearing on an. appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, on a verdict directed by the court, in an action to recover a sum of money retained as a fee by the plaintiff’s former attorney.
    
      A firmed.
    
    The facts are stated in the opinion,.
    
      Mr. Fidlon Lewis and Mr. John LUcloid for the appellant.
    
      Mr. Dion F. Birriey for the appellee.
   Pee Cuiuam:

Appellant, Sarah J. Thurston, plaintiff, below, sued defendant, Charles P. Diggs, to recover the sum of $1,541.30 retained by Diggs as attorney’s fees out of a sum collec;;ed in a suit conducted by him on behalf of plaintiff’s husband. It appears that the validity of this claim was litigated in a former case, which was disposed of by this court on appeal. Diggs v. Thurston, 39 App. D. C. 267. When this became apI arent in the course of the trial below, the court held that it was res judicata, and instructed a verdict for defendant. Prom the judgment this appeal was taken. The judgment was right, and is affirmed, without costs. Affirmed.  