The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-07-23
COURT GEORGES ATTORNEY.
NE WIS PAY UP TO MS CLIENT OR
he IN CONTEMPT.

TIL, Proceeding, Justice DAILY Says, II Reg
ulnr, Even After Judgment Taken, and
Rcsts on the Courts Power 70 Enforce
Upon Its Officers Honorable Conduct.
That the law will not only give Judgment
AGAINST an attorney for q clients money with
held, but will compel payment By proceedings
IN contempt, was evinced yesterday in q de-
ASTON Of Justice DAILY OF the Supreme Court,
who directed that Lawyer Adolph Cznki pay
$780, 80 to his former clients. Gabriel & sehall.
importers. Of POS Pearl street.
Lawyer Czaki had carried on certain litiea-
lions for Max Gabriel and Herman Schall. COM
posing the firm. against the SchillingeT Fire.
Proof Cement and Asphalt Company over q dis
puted contract aud he had been paid different
Sums for his services. The firm paid him q
anal sum OF S059.S4. which its members held
was not only to cover any remaining fees due.
but any costs that might be imposed against
the firm In the actions. One Of the actions be-
ing settled. tho other action. being based
largely on the same premises. had to be dis
continued. and costs Of $196.30 were imposed
on It's discontlnuance against the firm. Czaki
would not pay these costs. 30 the firm. having
been compelled to pay them. sought reimburse
ment from their former attorney by suing him
In a municipal court for that amount Of money.
The firm obtained judgment forthe full sum.
but the Sheriff was unable to collect. The firm
then brought ummar proceedings in the Su-
prone Court to compel the attorney to pay the
Judgment on pain Of IMPRISONMENT for con-
tempt.
Czaki contended that as his former clients
had elected to take judgment against him he
and they were in the position Of debtor and
creditor. replacing that OF attorney and client.
o. the other side IL was urged that the courts
will give both remedies. against. an attorney.
49,. a,.snWr ~ ia 1nattnA V1nlUa n 90 1.
"One reason why the client resortihG to an
action at law, against his attorney In the first
TisHTt to a summary nm application Is because the
SsceFtain[9g The facts By judicial inquiry before
pute. A trial would have TO be had in the SUM
mary proceeding, either by Q referee or by the
attorney is not therefore put to unnecessary
cost or expense blythe resort TO an action in the
case. t thS action was brought in the municipal
court. whore the costs are not burdensome."
Quoting from the decision OF the Queens
Bench in the case of Grey. decided in 1892. the
'%"fHe court has a. punitive and disciplinary
The court. which is exercised, not for the pur-
pose Of enforcing legal rights. but for the pur-
P PSss Of Il the sp eoHrt!s o Rqn otieaTs. o0 T6Ss po SR t6 81
the court Is quite distinct from any legal rights
or remedies me dSso Of the he Pa nT t and Tbi SSSnn Meth there re-
strict legal rights Of the parties. IS 30 II
? ~solicitor obtains money by process Of law for
his client, quite irrespective OF any. legal LA
client, he is bound In the performance OF his
duty as a solicitor e hand 1t over 70 his client
spends 1t, or still having 1t he refuses to hand
II over, he commits an offence as an ofdcer Of
the, court which offence has nothing to do
Anything that may have beeA4 breach
Of his duty as o solicitor on his part before the
The decision o.. that court says further that
contempt proceedings would not hold ONLY, In
cases In which 1t did not appear that the judg-
ment against the attorney had been returned
unsatished. Justice DAILY ~conoludeSi
The attorney 10 In the position Of having In
: turned to the clients because not applied 70 the
purpose. for which he received It and which
been compelled to mako the payment which he
ought to have made"