James C. Clark vs. J. O. Sullivan and H. G. Voss, Interviewer.
Opinion filed June 9th, 1893.
Attorneys Lien for Compensation.
The lien of an attorney for money due his client, in the hands of the adverse party, under § 470, Comp. Laws, when secured by compliance with the requirements of that section, gives the attorney an interest in such moneys, similar to that of an equitable assignee thereof.
Lien Extends to Undertaking for Payment of Judgment.
His interest extends to and embraces the judgment rendered in the action to recover such moneys, and also the undertaking to pay such judgment, given by the defendant in such action on appeal, and also the cause of action on such undertaking against the surety thereon. The attorney has the same equitable interest in such judgment, undertaking, and cause of action upon the undertaking that he has in the money due his client from the adverse party.
Surety—Right to Set Off—Priority.
When, however, the surety on such undertaking, after the attorney had secured his lien, but before the surety had notice thereof, purchased a judgment against the client, held that, in an action upon the undertaking, on appeal, the surety's right to set off such judgment was absolute, and was unaffected by the attorney's lien,
Notice of Lien—Upon Whom Binding.
The entry of notice of lien under Subd. 4 of § 470 is not notice to any except the judgment debtor.
Rights of Assignee of Judgment.
One who buys a set off to a claim against him, without notice of a prior assignment of such claim, may use the set off as a defense, the same as though the claim against him had not been assigned.
Appeal from District Court, Morton County; Winchester, J.
Action on a bond by James C. Clark against James O. Sullivan. Henry G. Voss intervened, claiming an interest in the controversy. From the order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint in intervention, intervener appeals.
Affirmed.
H. G. Voss, for appellant.
Interveners lien for attorneys fee’s upon the judgment and the
