Consumer's Poultry Dealers Corp. v. Podberesky Bros.

244 A.D. 754
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 15, 1935·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order adjudging judgment debtor, by its secretary and treasurer, guilty of contempt in supplementary proceedings and imposing a fine of $1,533.13 modified by reducing one item in the fine, consisting of the amount of the judgment, from $1,003.13 to $250, thus reducing the total of the fine imposed to $780, and as so modified unanimously affirmed, without costs. The showing with respect to “ actual loss or injury ” resulting “to a party to an action or special proceeding, by reason of the misconduct proved against the offender ’’ was insufficient to justify a fining of the offender the amount of the judgment. The limit of the judgment in respect of that element was $250. The •fine, so far as it related to costs and expenses, was proper. (Judiciary Law, § 773; Weddle v. Grzeczezak, No. 2, 189 App. Div. 493; Matter of Starr v. Morange, 119 Misc. 376; Matter of Schwartz v. Sill, 85 id. 55; Whitman v. Haines, 51 Hun, 640; affd. on opinion of Brady, J., at Special Term, 119 N. Y. 639.) Present1— Lazansky, P. J-, Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Seudder, JJ.

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

Consumer's Poultry Dealers Corp. v. Podberesky Bros., 244 A.D. 754 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

244 A.D. 754 (Consumer's Poultry Dealers Corp. v. Podberesky Bros.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barclays Bank, PLC v. Hughes
306 A.D.2d 406 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re the Estate of Gurevitch
166 Misc. 439 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1938)
Williamson v. Drogaris
248 A.D. 627 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1936)