Schriever v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad
New York Supreme Court
Motioh by the plaintiff’s attorney to enforce Ms lien, for an-agreed contingent compensation after settlement of the action between the parties, by prosecuting the action to judgment, or for other relief. Ho fraud against the attorney in the settlement was claimed.
1Opinion of the Court
Gaynor, T.:
This action was to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff agreed to pay his attorney for his compensation forty per cent, of the amount that should be realized in the action. The defendant and the plaintiff settled the case by the payment of $350 to the plaintiff. The settlement was made behind the plaintiff’s attorney, and without his knowledge. The plaintiff has spent the money and is irresponsible. Section 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure gave the plaintiff’s attorney a lien on the cause óf action for his compensation, and says that “ the lien cannot be affected…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Peri v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- President of the Michigan State Bank v. HastingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1844
- Coughlin v. . N.Y.C. and H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Lee v. Vacuum Oil Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- McDonald v. NapierSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gooding v. LyonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1917
- Zimmer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1900