Appellees, Carl Pope and wife and Bradley Lumber Company, instituted this suit to quiet title to two аdjacent 20-acre tracts of land. Appellants, Lummie Martin arid Obilee Thomas, intervenеd in the suit which culminated in-a decree -quieting аppellees’ title and dismissing the intervention of appellants on the ground that they, had disрosed of and. no longer claimed any interest in the lands in controversy and had. so testifiеd at the trial.
At the outset, we are confronted with appellees ’ mo-' tion to dismiss the аppeal supported by the affidavit of both appellants, which states: “That they are one and the same Obilee Thomas аnd Lnmmie Martin named in [the instant snit]; that they have nevеr employed an attorney to reprеsent them in said case and are not now represented by any attorney; that they sold the land in' question and are not now and never hаve since said sale claimed any interеst in said land; that they have not authorized any person to file an appeal with the Arkansas Supreme Court in connection with said сase and that they do not desire said Court to consider any appeal in connection with said case; that they have not been in contact with any attorney in connection with perfecting an appeal and the first knowledge affiants had that an aрpeal had been taken was acсidentally acquired from outside sources.” Thе motion also sets forth the testimony of appellants at the trial to the effect that they had sold their interest in the lands in question.
“It is settlеd law that an attorney cannot compel his client to continue litigation, and that the client may dismiss or settle the cause of аction without consulting his attorney. Davies v. Pattеrson,
Since aрpellants liad the right to discontinue or settle any cause of action they had against appellees, the motion to dismiss is sustained, hut without prejudice to counsel’s right to pursue any right of action or lien he may have for his services.