COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT 
                        COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA 
                             NO. 69101
BURT H. SAGEN                   :     ACCELERATED DOCKET
                                :
        Plaintiff-appellant     :
                                :      JOURNAL ENTRY
     -vs-                       :           AND
                                :         OPINION
RAYMOND THROWER, ET AL.         :
                                :
        Defendant-appellees     :        PER CURIAM
                                :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT            :       OCTOBER 12, 1995
  OF DECISION                   :                        
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING         :    Civil appeal from
                                     Parma Municipal
                                :    Case No. 94-CVF-2525
JUDGMENT                        :    REVERSED AND REMANDED
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION          :                        
APPEARANCES:
For plaintiff-appellant:           For defendant-appellees:
PAUL MANCINO, JR., ESQ.            RAYMOND THROWER, PRO SE
Suite 1016                         CAROL THROWER, PRO SE
75 Public Square                   3948 Wetmore Road
Cleveland, OH 44113-2098           Cuyahoga Falls, OH 44223
                               - 2 -
PER CURIAM:
     This cause came on  to be heard upon the  accelerated calendar
pursuant to App. R. 11.1 and Loc. R. 25, the records from the Parma
Municipal Court and  the briefs.   Plaintiff Burt Sagen filed  this
action against defendants Raymond and  Carol Thrower, alleging they
owed him  $5,000 for legal services  he performed on  behalf of one
Thomas Balsz.   The complaint alleged Balsz had been  indicted in a
criminal matter  as a  co-defendant along  with two of  defendants'
sons.  Because  the sons' legal interests were aligned with that of
Balsz, defendants allegedly asked plaintiff  to represent Balsz for
the sum  of  $5,000.   Defendants  filed a  motion  to dismiss  the
complaint as barred by  R.C. 1335.05, the Statute  of Frauds.   The
trial  court  granted  the  motion   to  dismiss  without  opinion.
Plaintiff's two assigned errors contest the dismissal.
     Accepting the allegations of the complaint as true, Greeley v.
Miami Valley Maintenance Constrs., Inc. (1990), 49 Ohio  St.3d 228,
we find the trial court erred by dismissing the complaint for being
within the Statute of Frauds.  It is conceivable plaintiff can show
the  circumstances indicate defendants' leading object in promising
to pay Balsz's attorneys fees was  to subserve their own interests.
If  that  is the  case, the  oral contract  would fall  outside the
Statute of Frauds.  See Drake, Phillips, Kuenzli & Clark v. Skundor
(1986), 27 Ohio App.3d 337.  The assigned errors are sustained.
     Judgment reversed and remanded.
                               - 3 -
     This cause is  reversed and  remanded for further  proceedings
consistent with the opinion herein.
     It  is ordered that  appellant recover of  appellees his costs
herein taxed.  
     It  is ordered that a special  mandate issue out of this Court
directing said court to carry this judgment into execution.
     A certified  copy of this  entry shall constitute  the mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.  
                                   JOHN T. PATTON, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                   LEO M. SPELLACY, JUDGE
                                   DIANE KARPINSKI, JUDGE
N.B.   This entry  is made pursuant  to the third  sentence of Rule
22(D), Ohio Rules  of Appellate  Procedure.  This  is an  announce-
ment of  decision  (see Rule  26).   Ten (10)  days  from the  date
hereof, this document will be  stamped to indicate journaliza-tion,
at which time  it will become the  judgment and order of  the court
and time period for review will begin to run.  
.