Dienst v. McCaffrey

32 N.Y.S. 818, 66 N.Y. St. Rep. 200
New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided February 15, 1895·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PRYOR, J.

An attorney’s lien on a judgment for his costs and compensation, though without notice, prevails over the lien of the creditor in a supplementary proceeding against the party recovering the judgment. Upon the examination of a third party in a supplementary proceeding, it was discovered that the execution debtor held a judgment against him, and thereupon an order was entered requiring him to pay the judgment in satisfaction of the execution creditor. The attorney who procured the judgment now intervenes, with a motion to vacate that order and to protect his lien. • The judgment against the third party is, of course, available only to the extent of the execution debtor’s interest in it. The attorney has. a lien on the judgment for the amount of his costs and compensation. Washburn v. Mott (Cir. Ct.) 12 N. Y. Supp. 111; Guliano v. Whitenack (Com. Pl. N. Y.) 30 N. Y. Supp. 415; Lee v. Oil Co., 126 N. Y. 579, 27 N. E. 1018; Palmer v. Van Orden, 64 How. Pr. 79. Notice of the lien is not necessary to its efficacy. Keeler v. Keeler, 51 Hun, 505, 4 N. Y. Supp. 580; Guliano v. Whitenack, supra; Washburn v. Mott, supra. The motion is granted, with costs; but, finding in the papers no proof of the amount of the attorney’s compensation, it must be ascertained upon a reference. 1 Bliss’ Code, p. 77.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dienst v. McCaffrey, 32 N.Y.S. 818, 66 N.Y. St. Rep. 200 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

32 N.Y.S. 818 (Dienst v. McCaffrey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bamberger v. Oshinsky
21 Misc. 716 (New York Supreme Court, 1897)
Kennedy v. Carrick
18 Misc. 38 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1896)