- 13 -
Cotnam v. Commissioner, supra at 125.
The State of Texas, unlike the State of Alabama, does not
regulate attorney's liens by statute. Instead, Texas relies upon
common law for authority on this issue. Thomson v. Findlater
Hardware Co., 156 S.W. 301, 303 (Tex. Civ. App. 1913).
In Texas, an attorney's lien is paramount to the rights of
the parties in the suit and is superior to other liens on the
money or property involved. In re Willis, 143 Bankr. 428, 432
(Bankr. E.D. Tex. 1992). However, a lien is neither property nor
a debt, but a right to have satisfaction out of property to
secure the payment of the debt. Crutcher v. Continental Natl.
Bank, 884 S.W.2d 884, 888 (Tex. App. 1994); Texas Bank & Trust
Co. v. Custom Leasing, Inc., 402 S.W.2d 926, 930 (Tex. Civ. App.
1966); Windham v. Citizens Natl. Bank, 105 S.W.2d 348, 350 (Tex.
Civ. App. 1937). In Texas, an attorney at law has not been given
a general lien on a cause of action or a judgment or money until
it was collected and in his hands. Finkelstein v. Roberts, 220
S.W. 401, 405 (Tex. Civ. App. 1920). Furthermore, while an
attorney has a lien on money collected by him for his client, he
has no such lien for the debt in the hands of the debtor before
5(...continued)
right and power over said suits, judgments and decrees,
to enforce their liens, as their clients had or may
have for the amount due thereon to them. [Cotnam v.
Commissioner, 263 F.2d 119, 125 n.5 (5th Cir. 1959)
(quoting 46 Ala. Code sec. 64 (1940) (quotation marks
omitted)), affg. in part and revg. in part 28 T.C. 947
(1957).]
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011