Camp v. Camp

• Decision Date: 11 April 1960
• Citation: 203 N.Y.S.2d 144,22 Misc.2d 130
• Parties: Dorothy Dadura CAMP, Plaintiff, v. Nickolas D. CAMP, Defendant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

Page 144

203 N.Y.S.2d 144

22 Misc.2d 130

Dorothy Dadura CAMP, Plaintiff, v. Nickolas D. CAMP, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County, Part I.

April 11, 1960.

Moses M. Falk, Brooklyn, for plaintiff.

Lipton & Silverstein, Jamaica, for defendant. Ira L. Hyams, Jamaica, of counsel.

MARIO PITTONI, Justice.

Three motions: (1) for a money judgment for arrears in alimony, (2) cross motion by the defendant for an accounting by the plaintiff as a receiver in sequestration, and (3) by the plaintiff as receiver for permission to proceed with the sale of premises located at 26 Lucille Drive, Syosset, New York.

The defendant is in arrears in the payment of alimony directed by a judgment of separation dated July 15, 1959 (21 Misc.2d 908, 189 N.Y.S.2d 561; 21 Misc.2d 563, 196 N.Y.S.2d 368). The plaintiff may apply for a money judgment even though she is the receiver in sequestration, for as provided in Section 1171-b, Civil Practice, Act, 'The relief herein provided for is in addition to any and every other remedy to which the wife may be entitled under the law' (italics supplied). The judgment provides for the payment of $65 a week alimony as long as the wife resides at 26 Lucille Drive, Syosset, with $25 additional to be paid each week on an award of temporary alimony of $2,470 covering the period from October 30, 1958 to July 15, 1959. Counsel fees of $2,500 were also provided. Plaintiff admits withdrawing from sequestered funds for alimony the sum of $1,840 to January 29, 1960, and for counsel fees $1,250. Twenty-eight weekly payments of alimony should have been paid from the date of the judgment July 15, 1959 to the date of the order to show cause January 29, 1960. The total sum for alimony and counsel fees which should have been paid is $5,020. Subtracting therefrom the $3,090 admittedly withdrawn from the sequestered funds, a judgment may be entered for $1,930.

As to the defendant's cross motion for a accounting by the receiver, the Court will deny the relief requested at this time. The defendant has failed to comply with the orders of this Court. 'Where one who seeks the favor of the court has willfully flouted its orders, courts will be loath to exercise their discretion to grant such an applicant affirmative relief' (Brant v. Brant, 10 A.D.2d 567, 195 N.Y.S.2d 428, 429).

With respect to the third motion, permission to enter a contract of sale is granted to the receiver, but no stay will be granted as to the action by the Ridgewood...