Woods v. Verry
This text of 70 Mass. 357 (Woods v. Verry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This case is within the provision of Rev. Sts. c. 88, § 28, securing to an attorney a lien for his unpaid fees and [359]*359disbursements, on any execution lawfully in his hands; and this statute was only a revision and substantially a reenactment of Sts. 1810, c. 84, and 1830, c. 124. The whole amount of this execution, on a judgment for costs, was due to the attorney; the only execution ever issued on the judgment was lawfully in his possession when this suit was brought; the defendant had notice of the attorney’s rightful claim to the amount, and could not honestly or legally defeat that right by a payment to the judgment creditor. Baker v. Cook, 11 Mass. 236. Dunklee v. Locke, 13 Mass. 525. Little v. Rogers, 2 Met. 478. When a party has by law a lien on a chose in action, as he cannot have a manual possession, actual or constructive, which is necessary to secure a lien on a chattel, the law gives him the necessary means of making good his lien, and that is, .in cases like the present, an action in the name of the judgment creditor, which the debtor cannot defeat.
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
70 Mass. 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woods-v-verry-mass-1855.