Hargett v. McCadden

• Decision Date: 02 June 1899
• Citation: 33 S.E. 666,107 Ga. 773
• Parties: HARGETT v. McCADDEN et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

33 S.E. 666

107 Ga. 773

HARGETT v. McCADDEN et al.

Supreme Court of Georgia

June 2, 1899

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Where a person owes an attorney at law, and delivers him certain open accounts for collection, with the understanding between them that the attorney is to collect them, and to appropriate one half of the collection to the antecedent debt, and the other half as his fees for collecting, there being no written assignment of the accounts, and no intention to pass title thereto to the attorney, the latter obtains no legal or equitable title to the accounts.

2. When, therefore, the attorney reduces the claims to judgment and the judgment debtor is garnished by another creditor of the person who placed the accounts with the attorney for collection, and the money is brought into court, the attorney's claim of title will not prevail, as against the rights of the garnishing creditor. But his lien as attorney under the contract made with his client will, if reasonable as to amount, and not the result of a mere device to defraud creditors, prevail over the claim of the garnishing creditor for the amount agreed upon between him and his client for such fees.

Error from superior court, Muscogee county; W. B. Butt, Judge.

Garnishment by McCadden & McElwee against one Pekor. H. V. Hargett filed a claim to the fund. Judgment for plaintiffs in garnishment and Hargett brings error. Reversed.

Cameron & Hargett, for plaintiff in error.

W. H McCrory and J. E. Chapman, for defendants in error.

SIMMONS C.J.

Pekor was indebted to Hargett, an attorney at law, and, in order to discharge the indebtedness, turned over to him certain open accounts, with the understanding and agreement that Hargett should collect them, retain one half of the proceeds as his fees for collecting, and apply the other half to the debt which Pekor owed him. Hargett brought suit upon one of the accounts, and obtained judgment thereon. Pekor owed McCadden & McElwee, and they sued out garnishment, and had a summons served upon the persons against whom the judgment on the account had been obtained. This judgment, and the suit wherein it was rendered, were in the name of Pekor as plaintiff. Hargett filed a claim to the money, alleging that the title was in him by reason of his contract with Pekor except as to a certain portion which he claimed as his fees. The money was paid into court. On the trial before the judge, Hargett sought to...