Agaj v. Boston College

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
____________________________________
AVENIR AGAJ, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. 24-CV-10884-JEK
v. )
)
BOSTON COLLEGE, )
)
Defendant. )
)
____________________________________)
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DETERMINE
AND DISCHARGE ATTORNEY’S LIEN
[Docket No. 103]
November 12, 2025
Boal, M.J.
Unrepresented Plaintiff Avenir Agaj has moved to determine and discharge an attorney’s
lien.1 For the following reasons, I deny the motion without prejudice.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Agaj worked for Defendant Boston College as a landscaper until he was terminated for
refusing, on religious grounds, to be vaccinated against COVID-19, in violation of the College’s
policy. See Docket No. 1 at 1–2. On April 5, 2024, Agaj filed this action. Id. On February 19,
2025, Attorney Jay L. Wolman filed a notice of appearance on behalf of Agaj. Docket No.
67. On July 1, 2025, Attorney Wolman moved to withdraw, citing a breakdown in the attorney-
client relationship, and Judge Kobick granted the motion. See Docket Nos. 77, 86. That same
1 On September 24, 2025, Judge Kobick referred this case to the undersigned for all pretrial
proceedings and report and recommendation on dispositive motions. Docket No. 114.
Case 1:24-cv-10884-JEK Document 116 Filed 11/12/25 Page 1 of 3

day, Attorney Wolman filed a notice of attorney’s lien pursuant to M.G.L. c. 221, § 50. Docket
No. 78.
On September 10, 2025, Agaj filed a Motion to Determine and Discharge Attorney’s
Lien. Docket No. 103. Specifically, the motion contends that this Court should discharge the
attorney’s lien because (1) Attorney Wolman was negligent in his legal representation, and (2)
Attorney Wolman’s withdrawal was voluntary and unjustifiable. Id. at 1-3. Attorney Wolman
filed an opposition. Docket No. 106.
II. ANALYSIS
In Massachusetts, attorneys have a statutory right to assert a lien securing compensation
for their services. See M.G.L. c. 221, § 50. The statute provides, in pertinent part:
From the authorized commencement of an action, counterclaim or other
proceeding in any court, or appearance in any proceeding before any state or
federal department, board or commission, the attorney who appears for a client in
such proceeding shall have a lien for his reasonable fees and expenses upon his
client’s cause of action, counterclaim or claim, upon the judgment, decree or other
order in his client’s favor entered or made in such proceeding, and upon the
proceeds derived therefrom.
Id. However, an attorney’s lien “exists only on proceeds obtained by the client in the underlying
proceeding; consequently, if there are no such proceeds, there is no lien.” Curly Customs, Inc. v.
Pioneer Fin., 62 Mass. App. Ct. 92, 97 (2004).
Here, the action remains ongoing. There is no judgment or settlement. Therefore, no
attorney’s lien exists at this time, rendering any motion to determine the attorney’s lien
premature. See id. at 97-98 (agreeing with the trial judge’s conclusion that the motion to
determine an attorney's lien is premature until a party has prevailed and there are proceeds to
which the lien can attach); see also City of Beverly v. Bass River Golf Mgmt., Inc., 23-P-1256,
Case 1:24-cv-10884-JEK Document 116 Filed 11/12/25 Page 2 of 3

2025 WL 782731, at *3 (Mass. App. Ct. Mar. 12, 2025). Nor is it appropriate to discharge any
potential lien at this time.
III. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the motion is denied without prejudice.
/s/ Jennifer C. Boal
JENNIFER C. BOAL
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
.
Case 1:24-cv-10884-JEK Document 116 Filed 11/12/25 Page 3 of 3