
    HALLHEIMER v. BLOCH et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    March 11, 1910.)
    Appeal from Special Term, New York County. Action by Max Hallheimer against Morris.Bloch and another. From an order granting defendants’ motion to strike parts of the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Modified and affirmed. See, also, 120 N. Y. Supp. 1140.
    F. A. MeCloskey, for appellant.
    Gordon S. P. Kleeberg, for respondents.
   DOWLING, J.

Plaintiff brings this action to establish his lien as an attorney upon the proceeds of certain judgments upon a trial and upon appeal, in an action wherein Gustav Bloch was plaintiff and Morris Bloch was defendant, and wherein he was the attorney for Gustav Bloch. He further asks for judgment for the value of such services as he performed for Gustav Bloch apart from the services rendered in said action. The order, from which the present appeal is taken, directed the striking out of certain portions of the complaint herein as immaterial, irrelevant, incompetent, redundant, and scandalous. We are of the opinion that some of the matter stricken out was properly pleaded, and should have been allowed to remain, as it was essential to the proper setting forth of the plaintiff’s cause of action. The order appealed from will therefore be modified, by allowing the eighth paragraph of the complaint to remain as originally pleaded, with the exception of the words: “Thereby conclusively establishing the fact that the_ said claim of the said Gustav Bloch was a valid claim, that the defense of payment was a false defense, and that there was no settlement of the case, and such consent to discontinue, a mere contrivance to cheat and defraud and deceive in establishing the plaintiff’s lien.” The order is also modified by allowing the ninth and eleventh paragraphs to remain as originally pleaded. As thus modified, the order appealed from will be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the appellant. All concur.  