 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Rhodes v. Martinez9/6/1996
agreeing that a lien will be placed on all proceeds of a claim even if the attorney worked only on a portion of it. In his contract with Camacho. Rhodes agreed to "give a lien for your legal fee and advanced costs and expenses against the proceeds of my claim." The claim encompassed personal injury as well as property damage. Therefore, Camacho's lien applied to the settlement obtained by the Branch firm on the personal injury claim. See Robert L. Rossi, Attorney's Fees ยง 12:16 (2d ed. 1995).
{17} The Branch firm cites cases from other jurisdictions for the proposition that an attorney's charging lien reaches only funds which that attorney's efforts helped to establish. We are not persuaded because the cited cases are either from jurisdictions that have statutes governing attorneys' charging liens or represent common law traditions which differ from that laid down in Prichard. It is simply not the law in New Mexico that an attorney's charging lien is only effective against money recovered through that attorney's services. Under Prichard and Walters it can reach further if the agreement between the client and the attorney so provides. The Rhodes-Camacho agreement unambiguously says that Camacho is engaged to represent Rhodes on "all claims I may have arising out of the above accident," that Camacho is entitled to a contingency fee, and that Camacho is entitled to a lien "against the proceeds of my claim." There is no exception if Rhodes changes attorneys. The Court of Appeals may not enforce the agreement as Rhodes or the Branch firm now wishes it had been written, but must enforce it as it was written. ; . The agreement provides that Camacho's lien will reach the proceeds of the personal injury settlement.
{18} To say the Court will not rewrite the agreement for the parties does not necessarily mean the lien will be enforced in favor of his entire claim. The agreement allows Camacho's lien to reach funds recovered by Rhodes subsequent to Camacho's discharge. But an attorney's charging lien in New Mexico "is governed by equitable principles." (citing Prichard, 22 N.M. at 140, 159 P. at 41). The agreement is valid, but equity may choose whether to enforce it and to what extent. See Northern Pueblos Enters. and the Discussion in the following section. Camacho may bring a separate breach of contract suit against Rhodes to recover his fee. See . Cf. Northern P
{19} We note that Camacho waived any right he may have had under the contingency fee agreement, and under Walters, to collect one-third of the personal injury settlement by stating in his motion that he was not seeking any portion of the personal injury settlement. See ) ("'Waiver' is the intentional relinquishment . . . of a known right.") (citation omitted). To be decided is whether, under the circumstances of this case, equity will allow him to collect one-third of the property damage settlement amount from the proceeds of the personal injury settlement.
IV. Balancing The Equities
{20} We remand this matter to the trial court as there are several issues which must be addressed and evidence which may need to be taken to determine if equity should enforce the lien: (1) whether Camacho waived his right to enforce the lien by paying out the entire amount of the property damage recovery to Rhodes; (2) whether the Branch firm is estopped from asserting any defenses to Camacho's claim, including its reasonableness; and (3) whether Camacho's lien should have priority over the Branch firm's entitlement to recover its fees.
A. Did Camacho waive a right to recover the fees for the property damage settlement?
{21} We decline to find as a matter of law that Camacho waived his attorney
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 New Mexico Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|