Liens may be defeated by settlement; Hawkins v. Loyless, 39 Ga. 5 ; Ellwood v. Wilson, 21 Ia. 523; if there is no collusion; Henchey v. City of Chicago, 41 Ill. 136.
It is said to be not a lien, but a right of set-off ; Appeal of McKelvey, 108 Pa. 615.
The lien is denied absolutely in some states; Marshall v. Cooper, 43 Md. 46; Levy v. Steinbach, 43 Md. 212; Stewart v. Flow ers, 44 Miss. 530, 7 Am. Rep. 707; Frissell v. Haile, 18 Mo. 18 ; Olds v. Tucker, 35 Ohio St. 581; Irwin v. Workman, 3 Watts (Pa.) 357 ; though some cases, denying the lien hold that fees may be deducted from money in hand; Balsbaugh v. Frazer, 19 Pa. 95; Casey v. March, 30 Tex. 180; see 12 Op. Atty. Gen. 216; but in another case it was said that in the absence of an express agree ment, an attorney's lien is not acquired upon a judgment rendered in a suit prosecuted by him, nor upon the money recovered by means of his legal services ; Dougherty v. Hughes, 165 Ill. 384, 46 N. E. 229.
It has been said that an attorney has no lien, even upon a judgment recovered by him, unless given by statute; Lamont v. R. Co., 2 Mackey (D. C.) 502, 47 Am. Rep. 268; and that his only right is to be protected by the court in the control of the judgment and its incidental processes against his client and the opposite party colluding with him, and in matters of equitable set-off ; Horton v. Champlin, 12 R. I. 550; 34 Am. Rep. 722. In Humphrey v. Browning, 46 Ill. 476, 95 Am. Dec. 446, where many cases were cited, it was held that an attorney has no Hen upon land recovered by him in ejectment.
An attorney has a lien on land for sums expended for his client's benefit in obtaining full title; Hodges v. Ory, 48 La. Ann. 54, 18 South. 899; but not for fees in maintain ing title; Weill v. Levi, 40 La. Ann. 135, 3 South. 559; also on a judgment in favor of defendant for costs; In re Lazelle, 16 Misc. 515, 40 N. Y. Supp. 343; and the attorney of a stockholder in a suit to set aside a fraudulent conveyance by the officers of the corporation, has a lien for his fees on the property recovered; Grant v. Mountain Co., 93 Tenn. 691, 28 South. 90, 27 L. R. A. 98; also on money collected for his client until paid the general balance due him for his services; Scott v. Darling, 66 Vt. 510, 29 Atl. 993. An attorney for plaintiff in an action by an administrator to recover damages for the death of his intestate has a lien on the amount recovered; Lee v. Van Voorhis, 78 Hun 575, 29 N. Y. Supp. 571; but one re
tained by a legatee to procure the establish ment of a will has none, for his services, on the legacy to his client; Fuller v. Cason, 26 Fla. 476, 7 South. 870. In proceedings to compel an attorney to deliver up property Where his claim is indefinite, a reference is properly ordered to ascertain the amount, giving plaintiff the option of making a de posit sufficient to secure whatever amount may be established on the reference, and he is not deprived of his lien simply because his claim is indefinite; In re Taylor Iron & Steel Co. v. Higgins, 137 N. Y. 605, 33 N. E. 744. An equitable lien is acquired by an attorney where, by an agreement with the owner of property condemned for a city street, he pro cures an increase in the amount of damages awarded; Gates v. De La Mare, 66 Hun 626, 20 N. Y. Supp. 837. He has a lien upon the cause of action for agreed compensation, which attaches to the judgment and the proceeds thereof, superior to the rights of a receiver appointed in supplementary pro ceedings; Steenburgh v. Miller, 11 App. Div. 286, 42 N. Y. Supp. 333.
It has been held that an attorney has no lien, at common law, on his client's cause of action ; Sherry v. Nay. Co., 72 Fed. 565; or, independently of a statute, for services; Ward v. Sherbondy, 96 Ia. 477, 65 N. W. 412 ; or in a proceeding by a guardian for the re moval of funds of his ward to a foreign state, for fees incurred in the proceeding; Manson v. Stacker (Tenn.) 36 S. W. 188. The lien cannot be asserted against money appropriated by a legislative act, while it is in the hands of the state treasurer ; State v. Moore, 40 Neb. 854, 59 N. W. 755, 25 L. R. A. 774. The attorney employed by a pledgee of notes, impounded in an equity suit, to sue on them at law, has no lien up on the fund realized, as against the other parties to the equity suit ; Gregory v. Pike, 67 Fed. 837, 15 C. C. A. 33. An agreement on the settlement of certain cases that the fees of an attorney should be included in the fees to be paid in another case, if a judg ment be recovered, does not create a lien on the judgment for fees on the cases set tled; Foster v. Danforth, 59 Fed. 750. Where an attorney received money for bail, to be returned on final disposition of the charge, it was held that an attorney's lien did not exist on the money, his agreement being to return it on receiving it back from the magistrate; State v. Lucas, 24 Or. 168, 33 Pac. 538.