Liens For Attorney Fees: Prior Counsel’s Senior Contractual Attorney Lien From Settlement Agreement Had Priority Over Subsequent Counsel’s Later Contractual Lien Set Forth In Retainer Agreement

Arbitration Found Settlement Agreement With Attorney Lien Was Valid, So Priority Was Clear Cut.

            Arkius, Inc. v. Yeh, Case No. B271221 (2d Dist., Div. 1 July 3, 2018) (unpublished) was not a hard call for either the trial or appellate courts. In this case, a prior counsel reached a settlement with the client by which counsel was granted an attorney lien for his services plus an agreement to deduct a stated sum from any amounts collected in certain lawsuits. Client then entered into a later, post-settlement retainer agreement with a different counsel, also containing an attorney lien. An arbitration between prior counsel and client found that the settlement agreement was valid. Subsequent attorney claimed to have a prior contractual attorney lien, but that was belied by the fact that prior counsel’s settlement agreement lien predated subsequent counsel’s retainer agreement such that prior counsel had lien priority. “First in time” is the guiding rule with respect to the priority of contractual attorney liens as well as whether a contractual lien has priority over a subsequent judgment lien (it does). (See Civ. Code, §2897; Brown v. Superior Court, 116 Cal.App.4^th 320, 328 (2004).)