Majority
Headnote
1. Attorney and Client (§ 182[1] )—Lien of Attorney—Merger in Judgment.On April 2, 1909, Isaac C. Wickes commenced actions in the Municipal Court against one Brenner, and one Perrington for goods sold and delivered; their attorney being J.
On April 28th said Murphy, the attorney, received an assignment of these judgments, which assignments operated to effectuate his attorney’s lien, which then became merged in the judgments. Thereafter Murphy assigned these two judgments to the petitioner herein, who now seeks to have the committee directed to pay the same. In the meantime the committee had commenced new actions against Brenner and Perrington, which went to judgment; but the judgments were obtained after Murphy had assigned his judgments to the petitioner. Under these conditions no right to set-off existed, for such right must exist as of the time when the assignment was made, and at that time there was no judgment in favor of the committee which could be offset against the judgments for costs. Fera v. Wickham, 135 N. Y. 223 , 31 N. E. 1028 , 17 L. R. A. 456 .
The order appealed from must therefore be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the application to direct payment granted, with $10 costs. All concur.
Cases cited
- Fera v. Wickham 135 N. Y. 223 p. 1034