Case Name: In re ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SEVENTH ST.; In re DEERING
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1893-12-15
Citations: 26 N.Y.S. 1114
Docket Number: 
Parties: In re ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SEVENTH ST. In re DEERING.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 26
Pages: 1114–1114

Head Matter:
In re ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SEVENTH ST. In re DEERING.
(Supreme Court General Term, First Department.
December 15, 1893.)
James A. Deering interposed a claim in the proceeding for the opening of One Hundred and Twenty-Seventh street
Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and O’BRIEN and FOLLETT, JJ.
George G. Munger, for appellant.
Henry A. Powell, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The record upon which this appeal is heard shows beyond dispute that the relation of attorney and client between Deering and James Baird never existed; and as that relation is the necessary foundation for an attorney's lien, it follows that the attorney has' no lien upon the fund. The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.