With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". rendered in an earlier proceeding, the proceedings have been more related. In Turtle Creek Bank & Trust Co. v. Murdock (one of many cases cited in Recht), Murdock hired counsel who helped him establish his claim to title over a parcel of real property. See 150 Pa.Super. 277, 28 A.2d 320, 321 (1942). Once Murdock held title, a bank revived, then executed on, a judgment, causing the property to be sold at sheriffs sale. See id. Murdock’s counsel in the title dispute wished to impose a charging lien over the proceeds of the sheriffs sale. See id. The Pennsylvania Superior Court held that counsel was entitled to a charging lien because without counsel’s efforts, Murdock would not have had legal title and there would not have been a sheriffs sale or fund for distribution. See id. at 322 (<HOLDING>). Despite reservations about whether Leckey’s

A: holding a suit against a sheriff in his individual capacity was subject to section 1146llls notice requirements because the sheriff was acting in his official capacity
B: holding that action for lien seeks money damages because its goal is to seize or attach money in the hands of the government as compensation  
C: holding also that the money in the hands of the sheriff for distributions was  created or at least made available by the efforts of counsel
D: holding sheriff not a prosecutor even though he sat at counsel table with the district attorney
C.