Hyperlawhypertext legal database Howard v. Riker 11 Abb. N. Cas. 113

← Cases

Howard v. Riker

11 Abb. N. Cas. 113 Court N. Y. Supreme Court, First District; Special Term at Chambers, English

Delivered by *114 Haight, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 113
HOWARD v. RIKER.
N. Y. Supreme Court, First District; Special Term at Chambers,
July, 1882.

Headnote

Attorney’s Lien.—Settlement before Appearance and Answer. An attorney who appears and answers for the defendant with notice that the parties have settled since the commencement of the action, acquires no lien for costs, and the plaintiff should be allowed to discontinue without costs.
Motion on the part of the defendant to dismiss the complaint for want of prosecution.
It appeared from the papers that the summons was served November 15, 1880, that on the 3rd day of December, 1880, the parties settled, and that subsequently the defendant’s attorney appeared and served an. answer, after he had notice of such settlement.

[After stating facts as above.]—The parties had the right to settle, and the defendant’s attorney, not having appeared at that time, had no lien for costs. The plaintiff should be allowed to discontinue without costs.