Haber v. Haber
| Citation | 225 A.D.2d 664,639 N.Y.S.2d 476 |
| Parties | George HABER, Appellant, v. Lisa Strax HABER, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 18 March 1996 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Jay Landa, Garden City, for appellant.
Samuelson, Rieger & Yovino, Garden City (Kieth I. Rieger, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BALLETTA, J.P., and O'BRIEN, ALTMAN and FRIEDMANN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a matrimonial action, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.), dated December 23, 1994, as (1) held him in contempt of an order of the same court dated August 27, 1993, for his failure to provide pendente lite medical insurance for the defendant and the parties' children and to pay pendente lite medical expenses on their behalf and (2) directed him to obtain medical insurance on behalf of the defendant, to pay all outstanding unreimbursed medical expenses incurred by the defendant and the parties' children, and to pay the defendant's attorneys $500 for counsel fees.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In order to sustain a finding of contempt based on an alleged violation of a court order, it is necessary to establish that a lawful order of the court clearly expressing an unequivocal mandate was in effect (see, Guerriere v. Guerriere, 188 A.D.2d 583, 584, 591 N.Y.S.2d 475; see also, Frandsen v. Frandsen, 190 A.D.2d 975, 976, 594 N.Y.S.2d 87). Furthermore, a party who seeks to hold a spouse in contempt of court pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 245 must ordinarily exhaust her alternative remedies under that section. However, when the alternative remedies would be ineffectual, they need not be exhausted (see, Rosenblitt v. Rosenblitt, 121 A.D.2d 375, 502 N.Y.S.2d 803).
The defendant was properly adjudged to be in contempt of the pendente lite order dated August 27, 1994. The order clearly and unequivocally required the plaintiff to obtain medical insurance on behalf of the defendant and the parties' two children and to pay all ordinary or routine unreimbursed medical expenses incurred by them, which he failed to do. Moreover, the record reveals that alternative remedies under Domestic Relations Law § 245 would be ineffectual.
The Supreme Court properly resolved the contempt issue on the papers submitted without holding a hearing (see, Matter of Benny v. Benny, 199 A.D.2d 384, 605 N.Y.S.2d 311).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hayes v. Barroga-Hayes
...Law § 245; Tarone v. Tarone, 104 A.D.3d 760, 760, 960 N.Y.S.2d 329;Lopez v. Ajose, 33 A.D.3d 976, 976, 824 N.Y.S.2d 113;Haber v. Haber, 225 A.D.2d 664, 664–665, 639 N.Y.S.2d 476). Upon review of the defendant's contentions regarding the two judgments dated August 9, 2012, entered with respe......
-
Sutton v. Sutton
...breach” of the agreement ( Stein v. Sandow, 97 A.D.2d 838, 839, 468 N.Y.S.2d 910 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Haber v. Haber, 225 A.D.2d 664, 639 N.Y.S.2d 476; Metzger v. Metzger, 206 A.D.2d 352, 614 N.Y.S.2d 326). Since the defendant had actual knowledge of the subject provision......
- Goettler v. Peters
-
Muller v. Muller
...the defendant's admitted refusal to comply with the judgment presented no issue of fact so as to require a hearing (see, Haber v. Haber, 225 A.D.2d 664, 639 N.Y.S.2d 476; Coronet Capital Co. v. Spodek, 202 A.D.2d 20, 29, 615 N.Y.S.2d 351; Matter of Benny v. Benny, 199 A.D.2d 384, 388, 605 N......