Gray v. Giarrizzo
Decision Date | 22 January 2008 |
Docket Number | 2007-01261. |
Citation | 47 A.D.3d 765,2008 NY Slip Op 00455,850 N.Y.S.2d 549 |
Parties | KENNETH GRAY, Appellant, v. SALVATORE GIARRIZZO, Also Known as SALVATORE TARANTINO, Respondent. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
A party seeking to hold another party in civil contempt has the burden of proving the contemptuous conduct by clear and convincing evidence (see Rupp-Elmasri v Elmasri, 305 AD2d 394, 395 [2003]; Yeshiva Tifferes Torah v Kesher Intl. Trading Corp., 246 AD2d 538, 539 [1998]). In order to punish a judgment debtor for contemptuous conduct in reference to a CPLR article 52 money judgment enforcement device, the judgment creditor must establish the judgment debtor's "refusal or willful neglect" (CPLR 5251; see Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 5251.05). A subpoenaed witness must be shown to be in possession of or have reasonable access to the information sought in order for the subpoenaed witness to be held in civil contempt (see generally Yalkowsky v Yalkowsky, 93 AD2d 834, 835 [1983]).
At the contempt hearing held on July 19, 2006 the defendant testified that he did not have possession of or access to the financial information of his spouse, a nonparty, as sought by the plaintiff pursuant to an information subpoena served in accordance with CPLR 5224. The plaintiff submitted no evidence to the contrary. Thus, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in finding the evidence produced at the hearing insufficient to punish the defendant for contempt on the ground that he refused or willfully neglected to obey the information subpoena (see CPLR 5251; Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 5251.05).
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Korea Chosun Daily Times, Inc. v. Dough Boy Donuts Corp.
...that those defendants disobeyed a clear and unequivocal mandate contained in the subpoena deuces tecum (see CPLR 5251 ; Gray v. Giarrizzo, 47 A.D.3d 765, 850 N.Y.S.2d 549 ; Yeshiva Tifferes Torah v. Kesher Intl. Trading Corp., 246 A.D.2d 538, 539, 667 N.Y.S.2d 759 ; cf. Matter of Halioris v......
-
Samaritan-Compass VI Hous. Dev. Fund Corp. v. 1293-95 Rodman LLC
... ... (see Judiciary Law § 753 [A] [2]; El-Dehdan ... v El-Dehdan, 26 N.Y.3d 19, 29 [2015]; Gray v ... Giarrizzo, 47 A.D.3d 765, 766 [2d Dept 2008]) ... In ... opposition, Rodman failed to refute Samaritan's showing ... and ... ...
-
Allied Building Products, Corp. v. Apex Builders & Contractors Corp., 2008 NY Slip Op 33014(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 10/22/2008)
... ... Yalkowsky, 93 A.D.2d 834, 835, 461 N.Y.S.2d 54) ... Gray v. Giarrizzo, 47 A.D.3d 765, 766, 850 N.Y.S.2d 549 [2nd Dept., 2008] ... In order to hold a party in civil contempt for disobeying a ... ...
-
Tyson v. City of N.Y.
...Inc., 73 A.D.3d 659, 659 [1st Dept. 2010]; Clinton Corner H.D.F.C. v. Lavergne, 279 A.D.2d 339, 341 [1st Dept. 2001]; Gray v. Giarrizzo, 47 A.D. 3d 765, 766 [1st Dept. 2008]). The party seeking a contempt order bears the burden of proof ( Rupp-Elmasri v. Elmasri, 305 A.D.2d 394, 395 [2d Dep......