*  1  Dong.  3SS  (1779).  And  tee  Massachtttettn  &  So.  Con*.  Co.
«  Barker  ».  St.  Quintin,  IS  M.  &  W.  ».  GiU'«  Greek,  48  Fed.  top.  US.
441,  4S1.
104


3igitizeC  by  GOOgk


IN   WHAT   STATES  IT   PREVAILS.
[§158-


II.  In  what  State*  it  Prevails.
168.  It  mar  bo  stated  as  a  general  rule  that  an  attorney
has  a  lien  upon  a  judgment  obtained  for  his  olient  for  his
costs  in  the  suit.  In  most  of  the  States  tbia  rule  was  first  estab-
lished by  tbe  courts.  In  some  States  the  lien  did  not  exist  till
it  was  declared  by  statute ;  and  in  several  States,  in  which  the
courts  bad  established  the  lien,  this  has  by  statute  been  extended
or  modified  so  that  it  is  quite  a  different  thing  from  the  lien
which  the  courts  established  and  enforced.  A  summary  state-
ment in  a  note  hereto  annexed  shows  in  what  States  this  lien
prevails  in  some  form ; '  but  it  will  be  necessary  hereafter  to  refer
in  detail  to  the  legislation  and  the  adjudications  in  those  States

1  Bland,  93,  the  Chancellor  ssid  that  con.
tract*  between  solicitors  sod  auitoca  mail
be  decided  like  other  contract!.
Huischustts  :  see  §  183.
Michigan  :  see  $  1TB.
Kiimesota :  see  5  179.
Xisriasippi :  Stewart  p.  Flowers,  44
Miss.  313,  7  Am.  R.  707  ;  Pope  v.  Arm-
strong. 3  S.  &M.  £14  ;  Cage  d.  Wilkinson,
3  8.  4M.  2S3.    See  §181.
Koatana:  see  5  189.
Hobrsska:  seef  188.
Haw  Hampshire :  Young  v.  Dearborn,
27  N.  H.  324 ;  Carrier  v.  Boston  k  M.  R.
R  Co.  37  N.  H.  223  ;  Weill  ■>.  Hatch.  43

If.  H.  246  j  Whitoomb  v.  Straw,  62  N.  H.
