Finnegan v. Johnson

William T. FINNEGAN v. Valerie JOHNSON

96-717                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered November 18, 1996


1.   Attorney & client -- attorney's lien -- when available. -- The
     attorney's lien statute, Ark. Code Ann.  16-22-301 et seq.
     (Repl. 1994), on which appellant relied in seeking his lien,
     allows an attorney to obtain a lien for services based on his
     agreement with his client to provide for compensation in the
     event of settlement or compromise; the compensation is
     governed by contract; this statutory lien is available to
     attorneys who have been dismissed without cause.  

2.   Appeal & error -- agreement critical to appeal not abstracted
     -- case affirmed without reaching merits. -- Where the
     principal point in the appeal concerned the attorney-client
     agreement and although it was in the record, it was not
     abstracted, the case was affirmed without reaching the merits;
     there are seven justices of the Supreme Court and one record,
     and it is impossible for each of the seven judges to examine
     the one transcript. 


     Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Seventh Division; John B.
Plegge, Judge; affirmed.
     Appellant, pro se.
     Ralph Patterson, for appellee.

     Bradley D. Jesson, Chief Justice.
     The appellant, William T. Finnegan, an attorney, appeals an
order of the Pulaski County Circuit Court dismissing his claim for
an attorney's lien against appellee Valerie Johnson.  We affirm.  
     Appellant claims that appellee was injured in a bar fight at
a North Little Rock hotel, and that she retained his services by
entering into a contingent fee agreement whereby he would receive
a certain percentage upon settlement with the hotel.  After
appellee hired another attorney and subsequently settled her claim
against the hotel, appellant claimed he was entitled to a
percentage of the settlement under his contract with appellee.  
     The attorney's lien statute, Ark. Code Ann.  16-22-301 et
seq. (Repl. 1994), on which appellant relies in seeking his lien,
allows an attorney to obtain a lien for services based on his
agreement with his client to provide for compensation in the event
of settlement or compromise.  The compensation is governed by
contract.  See  16-22-302.  This statutory lien is available to
attorneys who have been dismissed without cause.  Williams v.
Ashley, 319 Ark. 197, 890 S.W.2d 260 (1995).  
     The entire case below and the principal point in this appeal
concern the attorney-client agreement.  While this contract is
contained in the record, it is not abstracted.  We have said many
times that there are seven justices of the Supreme Court and one
record, and it is impossible for each of the seven judges to
examine the one transcript.  Hardy Constr. Co. v. Arkansas State
Hwy. & Transp. D., 324 Ark. 496, 922 S.W.2d 705 (1996); Winters v.
Elders, 324 Ark. 246, 920 S.W.2d 833 (1996).  Because appellant
failed to abstract the critical document necessary for us to decide
this appeal, we must affirm without reaching the merits of his
argument. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(2). 
     Affirmed.
     Newbern, J., not participating.