Lytle v. Bach & Miller

• Decision Date: 15 May 1906
• Citation: 93 S.W. 608
• Parties: LYTLE v. BACH & MILLER.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

93 S.W. 608

LYTLE v. BACH & MILLER.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 15, 1906

Appeal from Circuit Court, Perry County.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Bach & Miller against Bertha D. Lytle. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Greene & Van Winkle and Wootton & Morgan, for appellant.

Kelly Kash, for appellees.

CARROLL C.

The appellees, as attorneys for appellant and her mother, Mary E Lytle, now dead, and who represented her mother while living and after her death the appellant, in a suit brought by one J. J. Fitzpatrick to recover from them the possession of a parcel of land in Hazard, Ky. were allowed by the court upon the termination of the case in favor of appellant--her mother having died previous to the judgment--a fee not exceeding $100, and were adjudged a lien upon the lot sought to be recovered by Fitzpatrick to secure the payment of their fee. Afterwards they brought this action against the appellant asking judgment against her for $100 and that their lien upon the lot be enforced. The appellant resisted the claim, and also denied that appellees had any lien on the lot. Evidence was taken by both parties, and when the case came on for trial the court gave the appellees a judgment against appellant for $100 and a lien on the lot to secure its payment, directing that it be sold for that purpose.

The appellant insists that the lower court erred in adjudging appellees the sum of $100 as a fee and in giving them a lien on the lot to secure its payment. Ky. St. 1903, § 107 provides that "attorneys at law shall have a lien upon all claims or demands put into their hands for suit or collection or upon which suit has been instituted for the amount of a fee which may have been agreed upon by the parties or in the absence of such agreement for a reasonable fee for the services of such attorney; and if the action is prosecuted to a recovery, shall have a lien upon that judgment for money or property which may be recovered for such fee." Under this statute, as construed by this court, attorneys only have a lien upon the money or property which may be recovered in action instituted by them. In Thompson v. Thompson, 65 S.W. 457, 23 Ky. Law Rep 1535, a suit was brought against James A. Thompson to cancel a deed made to him on the ground that it was procured by fraud and undue influence. In this suit Thompson's attorneys asserted a fee of $200,...