Rumrill v. Huntington
Supreme Court of Connecticut
¿€ ÁSE stated. This was a writ of error, brought ½ the Superior Court, by Rumrill against Huntington, to reverse a decree of the County Court. The question reserved for the opinion of this Court, arose upon the following case. !u h'ebnuiry, 1810, Huntington instituted a suit in chancery against Rumrill, before .the County Court, at the term in Mirck following.
Read the full summary
¿€ ÁSE stated. This was a writ of error, brought ½ the Superior Court, by Rumrill against Huntington, to reverse a decree of the County Court. The question reserved for the opinion of this Court, arose upon the following case. !u h'ebnuiry, 1810, Huntington instituted a suit in chancery against Rumrill, before .the County Court, at the term in Mirck following. The material facts alleged in the petition, were as follows, viz., that on the 15th day of September, 1809, Rumrill, before the Superior Court, recovered a judgment- in ills favour against the petitioner, for the sum of 90 dollars…
1Opinion of the CourtJaRMBfix, J.
It is a general principle, Unit an attorney has a lieu for his services and expenses, on the papers and securities of the client, in his hands, of which he may avail himself in an action of trocir ; and that lie is answerable to Mm in account, only lor the balance of the avails, when collected.
But an attorney' has r.o lien upon a judgment obtained in favour of his client, which can vary or affect the rights of a stranger. No such lien is created, chher at common law, or by the principles of chancery.
in the present case, Bradley had no lien, which could avail him. As a bona fide creditor, he…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Marsh, Day & Calhoun v. SolomonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Andrews v. MorseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1838
- Gager v. WatsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
- Stewart v. FlowersMississippi Supreme Court · 1870
- Walker v. SargeantSupreme Court of Vermont · 1842
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.