Carter v. McPherson

Citations

• 104 Kan. 59
• 177 P. 533
• 1919 Kan. LEXIS 182

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Attorney’s Lien — Construction of Statutes. Section 484 of the General Statutes of 1915, amending section 8 of chapter 11 of the General Statutes of 1868, authorizes an attorney's lien on money due the attorney’s client and in the hands of the adverse party, in any “matter” in which the attorney was employed, as well as in any action or proceeding, the word “matter” in this connection meaning business or affair.</p> <p>2. Same — Sufficient Notice of Lien. Notice of an attorney’s lien, duly served, is adequate for the purpose, if it give information sufficiently definite and certain to enable the party served to protect himself in dealing with the attorney’s client.</p> <p>3. Same — A notice of attorney’s lien considered, and held to be sufficient.</p> <p>4. Same — Suit Dismissed and Settled by Plaintiff — Lien Not Abated — • Contract Contingent Fee Recoverable — Settlement Contract Prima Facie Evidence of Amount. In an action for damages for personal injury, the attorney for the plaintiff served notice on the defendant of an attorney’s lien. Afterwards the plaintiff dismissed the action, without the attorney’s knowledge or consent, and without' cause for discharge on his part, and, through another attorney, commenced a second suit on the same cause of action. This suit was settled by the plaintiff for a sum of money which she received pursuant to the terms of a written contract of settlement with the defendant. The attorney claiming a lien had a contract with the plaintiff for a percentage of the amount recovered, by suit or by compromise, as his compensation. Held, the dismissal of the first suit did not abate the lien; the attorney’s contract fixed the amount of his compensation, apd he was not relegated 'to recovery on quantum meruit; and the contract of settlement established, prima facie, the amount of money due the plaintiff from the defendant.</p>