Articles Posted in Attorney Liens

The case is captioned Camelot, Inc. v. Burke Burns & Pinelli, Ltd., 2017 IL App (2d) 170038-U. The Burke firm had handled shareholder litigation for the plaintiffs. That litigation ended in 2004. Ten years after the representation ended, in 2014, it attempted to serve a lien on certain real property owned by the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs sued for declaratory judgment.Plaintiffs obtained summary judgment that the lien was invalid.

The Appellate Court affirmed the grant of summary judgment and held that the lien claim was invalid under the Illinois Attorneys Lien Act 770 ILCS 5/1. The court found a number of problems with the lien claim. First, the lien was asserted ten years after the representation ended, in violation of Illinois law. ¶23. Second, the court held that the “Act does not provide a remedy of foreclosure.” ¶24. The court also held that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the lawyers’ equitable lien claim.

Comment: It took chutzpah to assert a lien on a parcel of real estate ten years after the attorney-client relationship ended. In my view this lien claim was frivolous and the lawyers should have paid the plaintiffs’ attorneys fees.

Olszewski v. Jordan :: 2015 :: Connecticut Supreme Court Decisions :: Connecticut Case Law :: Connecticut Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia.

This case is from Connecticut and, obviously, is not binding in Illinois. It holds that a divorce attorney cannot assert an equitable lien on marital property in a marital dissolution action.

Randy M. Brown v. Universal Realty Group, et al. 2010 L 008953, 2014 IL App (1st) 1420241-U.

This is an unpublished opinion by the First District, Sixth Division, affirming a decision of the circuit court of cook county, which adjudicated an attorney’s lien of Brooks, Tarulis & Tibble (BT&T) to zero. Please note that I represented Randy Brown in this appeal.

The Illinois Attorney’s Lien Act, 770 ILCS 5/1 (2012) allows an attorney to place a lien on a client’s claim or cause of action. According to the opinion, Brown operated a Harold’s Chicken Shack restaurant in a building in Broadview, Illinois. The roof of the building collapsed, which destroyed Brown’s store. Brown, represented by Elizabeth Bacon, filed suit against the management company and the owners of the building. Ms. Bacon later joined BT&T. “On December 4, 2012, BT&T, by certified mail, served a notice of attorney’s lien on the attorney representing all defendants in the suit. The notice of attorney’s lien stated that Randy Brown, on or about September 12, 2011, had ‘placed in our hands’ the suit against defendants relating to the collapse of the building on January 15, 2009.  The notice of attorney’s lien further stated plaintiffs had agreed to pay BT&T ‘for all legal services rendered from whatever amount may be recovered,’ and to reimburse BT&T’s costs. The notice of attorney’s lien was served on December 5, 2012, as evidenced by a signed certified mail receipt contained in the record.”

Goyal v. GAS TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE, 718 F. 3d 713 – Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 2013 – Google Scholar.

The Seventh Circuit sanctioned an attorney for asserting an attorney lien long after the lawyer was terminated.

The Facts:

AXA CORPORATE SOLUTIONS ASSURANCE v. HOFF & HERRAN, Dist. Court, ND Illinois 2013 – Google Scholar.

The Illinois Attorney Lien Act of 1909 (yes, that is not a typo) provides that an attorney can place al lien on a claim that his client places with him for collection. Liens are typically asserted in contingent fee cases. A lawyer who is paid by the hour usually does not have a lien because he has already been fully compensated.

The typical lien situation is one where a claimant hires a lawyer to sue someone. Filing suit is not enough for an attorney lien. Instead, the lawyer must serve the party “against whom” the client has a claim. That means that the lawyer must serve the adverse party with a copy of the lien. There is no requirement that the lawyer serve his own client with the lien.