Kahn v. Shainswit, No. 76 Civ. 2225.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
Citation414 F. Supp. 1064
Decision Date01 June 1976
PartiesMartin KAHN, Individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Hon. Beatrice SHAINSWIT, acting Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, et al., Defendants.
Docket NumberNo. 76 Civ. 2225.

414 F. Supp. 1064

Martin KAHN, Individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
Hon. Beatrice SHAINSWIT, acting Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, et al., Defendants.

No. 76 Civ. 2225.

United States District Court, S. D. New York.

June 1, 1976.


414 F. Supp. 1065

Harvey I. Sladkus, Ploscowe, Dweck & Sladkus, New York City, for plaintiffs.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. of the State of New York by Carl Saks, Asst. Atty. Gen., New York City, for defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER

PIERCE, District Judge.

Plaintiff Martin Kahn, a defendant in a divorce action pending before Acting Justice Shainswit in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, asks this Court to enter a preliminary injunction restraining defendants from the enforcement of N.Y.Dom. Rel.Law § 239 and to enter an order convening a three-judge court to consider the constitutionality of that statute. The issue was raised by order to show cause signed May 18, 1976 and does not involve any factual disputes. Cognizant that the first question was whether the doctrine of comity bars this application altogether, the Court directed the parties to submit on the law involved. The background of the controversy is as follows.

In March, 1974, Barbara Kahn, wife of the plaintiff, commenced an action for divorce on grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment in the Supreme Court of the State of New York. Plaintiff Martin Kahn interposed a counterclaim for divorce on grounds of adultery. By order of the State Supreme Court entered in March, 1975, the wife was granted alimony and counsel fees pendente lite. That order was affirmed by the Appellate Division. Upon plaintiff's failure to make the payments, the State Supreme Court granted the wife's application to have plaintiff cited for contempt, overruling plaintiff's argument that he was financially unable to pay the alimony. Plaintiff appealed the contempt order, claiming that it was error for the trial judge to hold him in contempt without a hearing on the issue of wilfulness. The order of contempt was affirmed by the Appellate Division.

The divorce action was thereafter set down for a jury trial before Acting Justice Shainswit, a defendant herein. On April 28, 1976, the wife moved, pursuant to Dom. Rel.Law § 239, to sever and stay the prosecution of the husband's adultery counterclaim in light of his contempt. By this point, plaintiff had absented himself from the jurisdiction and the trial judge had adjourned the matter several days in the hope that plaintiff would return and purge himself of the contempt. Finding no other effective sanction against plaintiff for his continued defiance of the court's orders, Justice Shainswit accordingly foreclosed plaintiff from the opportunity to present his counterclaim; see Kahn v. Kahn. No. 31470/74 (Sup.Ct.N.Y.Cnty. May 10, 1976).

At trial, the jury found for the wife on her claim of cruel and inhuman treatment. Counsel for plaintiff herein recorded objections to the constitutionality of § 239 and, while not requesting the state court to rule on that claim, stated that he was reserving the option to press the argument in federal court, citing England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners, 375 U.S. 411, 84 S.Ct. 461, 11 L.Ed.2d 440 (1964).

Justice Shainswit thereafter took evidence on the question of finances and alimony and rendered her decision thereon by opinion dated May 10, 1976. The judge directed the submission of appropriate orders staying and severing the counterclaim and granting the judgment of divorce. While proposed orders have been submitted to that court, Justice Shainswit has stated that she will not enter the orders pending the outcome of this application.

Plaintiff commenced this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3), § 2201, § 2281 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking an injunction against alleged deprivation of civil rights by state officials and the convening of a three-judge court to consider the constitutionality of

414 F. Supp. 1066
Dom.Rel.Law § 239. The challenged statute provides as follows
"Whenever in an action for divorce or separation wherein the husband is plaintiff or wherein the wife is plaintiff but the husband interposes a counterclaim, the court or the judge thereof may refuse to grant an order to stay proceedings, where the only default is the failure of the husband to pay alimony or counsel fees due to his inability to make such payments. In no event shall a husband who has been imprisoned for contempt of court for failure to pay alimony or counsel fees . . . be stayed from proceeding with the prosecution or defense of an action where the only default is the failure of the husband to pay alimony or counsel fees." (N.Y.Dom.Rel.Law § 239 (McKinney 1964))

Thus, if the state court refuses to exercise its discretion in favor of the defaulting husband, the court may prevent him from taking any affirmative action in the lawsuit. A determination under § 239 will not be set aside by the appellate courts absent a showing of abuse of discretion; see Sherwood v. Sherwood, 5 A.D.2d 137, 170 N.Y. S.2d 122 (1st Dept. 1958); Novack v. Novack, 226 N.Y.S.2d 323 (Sup.Ct.1962). The statute does not allow the court to foreclose the defaulting husband from defending on the merits; such a provision was long ago declared violative of due process; see Hovey v. Elliott, 167 U.S. 409, 17 S.Ct. 841, 42 L.Ed. 215 (1897).

In this action, plaintiff claims that he faces irreparable harm if enforcement of § 239 is not enjoined....

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Aristocrat Health Club of Hartford v. Chaucer, Civ. No. H-77-553.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Connecticut)
    • May 8, 1978
    ...(alternate holding); Sorger v. Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority, 401 F.Supp. 348, 354 (E.D.Pa.1975); a divorce, Kahn v. Shainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D. N.Y.1976); proceedings to identify a child's father, Burdick v. Miech, 409 F.Supp. 982 (E.D.Wis.1975) (three-judge court); disciplina......
  • Wiesenfeld v. State of NY, No. 79 Civ. 0106.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • July 9, 1979
    ...the constitutional claims could be raised, Gras v. Stevens, 415 F.Supp. 1148 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (three-judge court); Kahn v. Shwainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D.N.Y. 1976); see also Moore v. Sims, ___ U.S. ___, 99 S.Ct. 2371, 60 L.Ed.2d 994, (1979); Spencer v. Spencer, 430 F.Supp. 683 (M.D.N.C.) ......
  • Johnson v. Kelly, No. 77-2225
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • September 29, 1978
    ...v. Nottingham Liquors, Ltd., 542 F.2d 652 (6th Cir. 1976); Gras v. Stevens, 415 F.Supp. 1148 (S.D.N.Y.1976); Kahn v. Shainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D.N.Y.1976). Although it seems clear that the Sixth Circuit has adopted a viewpoint on this issue contrary to our own, it should be pointed out......
  • Johnson v. Kelly, Civ. A. No. 75-3103.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • July 11, 1977
    ...Justice) (political party delegates); Gras v. Stevens, 415 F.Supp. 1148 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (three judge court) (divorce); Kahn v. Shainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (divorce); Burdick v. Miech, 409 F.Supp. 982 (E.D.Wis.1975) (three judge court) (proceedings to identify father of child l......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Aristocrat Health Club of Hartford v. Chaucer, Civ. No. H-77-553.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Connecticut)
    • May 8, 1978
    ...(alternate holding); Sorger v. Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority, 401 F.Supp. 348, 354 (E.D.Pa.1975); a divorce, Kahn v. Shainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D. N.Y.1976); proceedings to identify a child's father, Burdick v. Miech, 409 F.Supp. 982 (E.D.Wis.1975) (three-judge court); disciplina......
  • Wiesenfeld v. State of NY, No. 79 Civ. 0106.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • July 9, 1979
    ...the constitutional claims could be raised, Gras v. Stevens, 415 F.Supp. 1148 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (three-judge court); Kahn v. Shwainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D.N.Y. 1976); see also Moore v. Sims, ___ U.S. ___, 99 S.Ct. 2371, 60 L.Ed.2d 994, (1979); Spencer v. Spencer, 430 F.Supp. 683 (M.D.N.C.) ......
  • Johnson v. Kelly, No. 77-2225
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • September 29, 1978
    ...v. Nottingham Liquors, Ltd., 542 F.2d 652 (6th Cir. 1976); Gras v. Stevens, 415 F.Supp. 1148 (S.D.N.Y.1976); Kahn v. Shainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D.N.Y.1976). Although it seems clear that the Sixth Circuit has adopted a viewpoint on this issue contrary to our own, it should be pointed out......
  • Johnson v. Kelly, Civ. A. No. 75-3103.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • July 11, 1977
    ...Justice) (political party delegates); Gras v. Stevens, 415 F.Supp. 1148 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (three judge court) (divorce); Kahn v. Shainswit, 414 F.Supp. 1064 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (divorce); Burdick v. Miech, 409 F.Supp. 982 (E.D.Wis.1975) (three judge court) (proceedings to identify father of child l......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT