RUSSELL v. ZACCARIA

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly determined that the nonparty-appellant was not entitled to a lien pursuant to Judiciary Law § 475, as he failed to show that he was an attorney of record for the defendant Russell Zaccaria ( see Judiciary Law § 475; Rodriguez v. City of New York, 66 N.Y.2d 825, 827; D'Amico v. Nuzzo, 138 A.D.2d 667, 668; Matter of Barnum v. Srogi, 96 A.D.2d 723; Melzer v. 195 Broadway Corp., 18 A.D.2d 1108; Matter of Sebring, 238 A.D. 281).

We note that except to the extent that the Supreme Court's findings were necessary to determine whether Lloyd D. Feld was an attorney of record for Russell Zaccaria, the parties are not bound by the court's remaining findings.

RITTER, J.P., SMITH, H. MILLER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.