pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1335, requesting the court determine the relative priority of Coates’s lien and a lien of Kristi’s creditor, Dr. Donald Egan (Egan), on the annuity stream. The district court directed AIG to deposit $411,207.31 with the court. In a 2008 order, it ruled that Coates did not have a valid charging lien on Marc’s annuity stream because it never represented Marc. In 2009, it ruled that Coates did have a valid charging lien on Kristi’s annuity stream but, under § 12-5-119, Coates was entitled only to reasonable fees billed for services rendered in connection with obtaining the Probate Judgment, because only that judgment gave Kristi an interest in the annuity stream. See N. Valley Bank v. McGloin, Davenport, Severson & Snow, P.C., 251 P.3d 1250, 1253 (Colo.App. 2010) (<HOLDING>). The district court ruled that further
holding that to be timely the notice of a charging lien must be filed before the lawsuit has been reduced to judgment holding a summary judgment to be final although motion to assess attorney fees remained pending because award of attorney fees is collateral to judgment holding that the judgment referred to in rule 1525 must be the judgment under which the party claims the right to costs or fees holding that charging lien only includes fees generated in obtaining the judgment not fees unrelated to the judgment holding summary judgment order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of the defendants claim for attorneys fees