The New York herald., 1875-12-04
LIENS OF COUNSEL.

In the suit brought by Kate B. Rowland against
laura 8. Taylor individually and execurix OF james
Il. Taylor an appeal taken from order made
by Judge Donohuc substituting hessrs Wingate and
Cullen for Ruins j. Andrews attorney for Mrs Tay-
lor without making provision for the payment OF Mr..
Andrews advances and claims as attorney except re-
qurlng Mrs Taylor TO stpulate to pay whatever Mr..
Andrews might recover in judgment Mr. Andrews
appealed aud the Supreme Court, General Term, has
handed down opinion, delivered by Judge Brady,
Judges Davis and Daniels concurring which will be
found below and will be interesting the legal pro-
fession:--
IL is deemed unnecessary 10 consider the relations
between attorney and client illustrate by citations
the lien OF the attorney and the intention Of the courts
10 preserve IT, The learned Justice al the Special
Term recognized the lien and designed TO protect by
exactng the stipulation which required BY the
order made The respondent is evidently not in
pecuniary condition now TO pay the charges or lien OF
Mr. Andrews and the occurrences which severed their
relations connected with subsequent events make IL
apparent that he can no longer continue 70 be her
counsellor in tho proceedings which he thus far
TO have conducted with ability and success. When
this condition of things exists the question is what is
the best course be adopted by which the clients
terests shall not be eopardzcd on the one hand tho
attorneys lien sacrificed on the other Mr. Andrews
has been advancing money to his client, as he AYERS
and seems TO be admitted to enable her to pay the
expenses OF her household and he comedies that she
has not succeeded in obtaining security In matters
ia which IL was Of great Importance and that she has
suffered consequence. This justifes the Court
believing that she cannot furnish security Tor his claim
and also IN assuming that be acting for her under
the conviction that his compensation must bo derived
from the interest she has the chief subject matter OF
Abe controversies II must result from this that the
subject matter mentioned should the purpose OF
protecting the lien Of Mr. Andrews whatever that shall
DO adjudged TO be, and yet not such q mode
TO such amount rs TO unjustly embar-
fass the interests Of the respondent The etipu-
iation c2led for by tho order will not accom-
plish this, think because II relates to her
interest the estate Of James B. Taylor when real
Ized This Is not transfer Of any present right and
may not prevent conveyance OF the interest which
she possesses, whatever il may be There should be
NO doubt OF the efficacy OF the process employed for
execute an assignment OF part Of her interest as col
teral security for any that may be found duo to
Mr. Andrews, and an order OF reference entered to
ascertain tho OF his claim against her In this
way the fund which TO lie the source OF his com
pengation Will be applied 10 the payment OF his de-
nands and in this way hs lien will be protected The
assignment will prevent the transfer OF the funds TO his
prejudce We cannot see any other mode Of disposing
OF this controversy without provoking serious conse
quences 10 both partcs five require her 70 pay the
costs or give sccury II will place her interests ut the
mercy OF the plaintiff or compel her 20 continue the
professional relations between her and the appellant
which we must assume would be Objectionable 70 both
parties and thus necessarily subject her interests 70
UNJUST exposure while the other hand If We sustain
the order In reference 10 the stipulation shall de
prve the appellant OF the protection which he has the
right expect and which II intended he should
have when the motion decided against him. The
change OF attorney and counsel in this rests
the wish Of the respondent and not upon any miscon
duct OF the appellant The order will be modified as
herein suggested.