Baines v. Shapiro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baines v. Shapiro

299 A.D.2d 193, 748 N.Y.S.2d 868, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10738

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 12, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 299 A.D.2d 193 (Baines v. Shapiro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baines v. Shapiro, 299 A.D.2d 193, 748 N.Y.S.2d 868, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10738 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about January 22, 2002, which denied petitioner’s application to stay a warrant of commitment issued against him, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The appeal is not moot since there is no evidence before the court establishing that the sum owed has been paid by petitioner. Petitioner’s arguments with respect to the merits are, however, unavailing. It was within the Special Referee’s power to adjudicate petitioner to be in contempt since CPLR 4317 (a) provides without qualification that “parties may stipulate that any issue shall be determined by a referee” and petitioner knowingly consented to expand the Special Referee’s authority so that the “entire matter” was referred to him to hear and determine (cf. Batista v Delbaum, Inc., 234 AD2d 45). Petitioner’s remaining argument, that the underlying finding of contempt is barred by res judicata, is not properly before us. Were we to reach it, however, we would find it to be without merit since petitioner has failed to demonstrate any error in the Special Referee’s specific finding that the matters before him on the contempt hearing differed from the matters before the court in the prior proceeding. Concur — Buckley, J.P., Sullivan, Rubin, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about January 22, 2002, which denied petitioner’s application to stay a warrant of commitment issued against him, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The appeal is not moot since there is no evidence before the court establishing that the sum owed has been paid by petitioner. Petitioner’s arguments with respect to the merits are, however, unavailing. It was within the Special Referee’s power to adjudicate petitioner to be in contempt since CPLR 4317 (a) provides without qualification that “parties may stipulate that any issue shall be determined by a referee” and petitioner knowingly consented to expand the Special Referee’s authority so that the “entire matter” was referred to him to hear and determine (cf. Batista v Delbaum, Inc., 234 AD2d 45). Petitioner’s remaining argument, that the underlying finding of contempt is barred by res judicata, is not properly before us. Were we to reach it, however, we would find it to be without merit since petitioner has failed to demonstrate any error in the Special Referee’s specific finding that the matters before him on the contempt hearing differed from the matters before the court in the prior proceeding. Concur — Buckley, J.P., Sullivan, Rubin, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 A.D.2d 193, 748 N.Y.S.2d 868, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10738, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baines-v-shapiro-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack