New Jersey Statutes
N.J. Stat. § 2A:13-5 (2026)
Lien for services
✓ current as of May 2026
After the filing of a complaint or third-party complaint or the service of a pleading containing a counterclaim or cross-claim, the attorney or counsellor at law, who shall appear in the cause for the party instituting the action or maintaining the third-party claim or counterclaim or cross-claim, shall have a lien for compensation, upon his client's action, cause of action, claim or counterclaim or cross-claim, which shall contain and attach to a verdict, report, decision, award, judgment or final order in his client's favor, and the proceeds thereof in whosesoever hands they may come. The lien shall not be affected by any settlement between the parties before or after judgment or final order, nor by the entry of satisfaction or cancellation of a judgment on the record. The court in which the action or other proceeding is pending, upon the petition of the attorney or counsellor at law, may determine and enforce the lien.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49
cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1962–2026 · leading case: Hoffman & Schreiber v. Medina, 224 B.R. 556 (D.N.J. 1998).
Hoffman & Schreiber v. Medina, 224 B.R. 556 (D.N.J. 1998). “See N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:13-5. H & S maintained that debtor obtained said amount (which represented her interest in the marital home) as a result of the work that H & S performed on debtor’s behalf in connection with the underlying divorce proceeding.”
Giarusso v. Giarusso (In re Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello, PC), 187 A.3d 194 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2018). “10 plus interest pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:13-5 ; and 2) enter judgment against plaintiff in the amount of the fee award.”
In re Roper & Twardowsky, LLC, 559 B.R. 375 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2016). “It cites to a number of New Jersey cases that reference and apply the relevant attorney’s charging hen statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:13-5. 17 (Docket No. 232 at 3-5).”
John Giovanni Granata v. Edward F. Broderick, Jr., 143 A.3d 309 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2016). “N.J.S.A. 2A:13-5, commonly known as the Attorney's Lien Act (Act), provides, in pertinent part: After the filing of a complaint .”
Ross v. Scannell, 647 P.2d 1004 (Wash. 1982). “13 (1966); N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:13-5 (West 1952); N.”
New York-Connecticut Dev. Corp. v. Blinds-To-Go, 159 A.3d 892 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2017). “[At the court's direction, the published version of this opinion omits the remainder of Section II concerning pre-trial procedural facts; Sections III(E) and (F) concerning the Prompt Payment Act and an attorney's charging lien, N.J.S.A. 2A:13-5; Sections IV(C), (D), and (E)…”
Binder & Binder, P.C. v. Handel (In Re Handel), 570 F.3d 140 (3rd Cir. 2009). “”); N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:13-5 (West 2000) (“The court in which the action or other proceeding is pending, upon the petition of the attorney or counsellor at law, may determine and enforce the lien.”
The Indus. Network Sys., Inc. v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc. Steven M. Kramer, 54 F.3d 150 (3rd Cir. 1995). “But, more fundamentaHy, he reHed in his motion upon N.J.S.A. § 2A:13-5, which provides: After the filing of a complaint or third-party complaint or the service of a pleading containing a counterclaim or cross-claim, the attorney or eounseHor at law, who shaU appear in the cause…”
Musikoff v. Jay Parrino's the Mint, L.L.C., 796 A.2d 866 (N.J. 2002). “A] 2A:13-5, an attorney must file a petition to acknowledge and enforce the lien prior to any settlement or final judgment in the underlying matter in which the attorney provided services giving rise to the lien? In other words, is the last sentence of [N.J.S.A 2A:13-5] (“The…”
Berse v. Langman (In re Langnam), 465 B.R. 395 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2012). “The court found that the lien could not attach because based on the language of the Lien Act (N.J.S.A. 2A:13-5), a charging lien may only attach to the proceeds awarded in the attorney’s client’s favor, and there were no such proceeds awarded the husband-client.”
Ciecka v. Rosen, 908 F. Supp. 2d 545 (D.N.J. 2012). “§ 2A:13-5, expresses a policy of protecting New Jersey law firms and their clients from wrongful conduct of out-of--state attorneys.”
Martin v. Martin, 762 A.2d 246 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2000). “As recently as 1998, the Federal District Court, in reviewing an appeal from the bankruptcy court, noted that although lien perfection is determined by state law in federal bankruptcy, the New Jersey Supreme Court "has not decided the point at which the statutory attorney's lien…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.