An attorney's charging lien under Judiciary Law § 475 "attaches to a . . . judgment or final order in his client's favor, and the proceeds thereof." Thus, the procedure of Judiciary Law § 475 is designed to attach only the specific proceeds of the judgment or settlement in the action where the attorney appeared ( Butler, Fitzgerald Potter v Gelmin, 235 AD2d 218, 219), and since there had been no final judgment on equitable distribution in the underlying matrimonial action, the motion court erred in ordering that the amount fixed under the charging lien be paid within 30 days of the order.
The denial of the wife's cross motion was proper at this juncture. As the motion court recognized, the appropriate method for allocating responsibility for the attorney's fees generated in the underlying matrimonial action is upon the final determination of equitable distribution between the parties.
We have considered the wife's remaining contentions, including that the fee dispute was subject to arbitration, and find them unavailing.