Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. Chaney

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. Chaney

137 Misc. 2d 1079, 526 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1988 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 138

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJanuary 8, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 137 Misc. 2d 1079 (Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. Chaney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. Chaney, 137 Misc. 2d 1079, 526 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1988 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 138 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Order entered July 16, 1986 reversed, with $10 costs, the motion by respondent John Chaney to vacate the order of contempt entered on default on January 23, 1985 is granted, [1080]*1080and matter remanded to the court below for further proceedings.

Section 756 of the Judiciary Law provides, inter alia, that "unless otherwise ordered by the court”, the moving papers on an application to punish for contempt must be served no less than 10 days before the time the application is noticed to be heard. The court (Levister, J.) authorized short service in this matter, although it is not clear from the record why expedition was deemed necessary in light of the fact that the order respondent purportedly violated had been rendered more than one year earlier. In any event, respondent was served (under CPLR 308 [4]) only two days prior to the contempt hearing, and was unable to appear because he was outside the jurisdiction at the time. An application for an adjournment was denied. In this posture, and given the substantial penalties assessed against respondent, the order of contempt entered on default should be vacated so that respondent will have a meaningful opportunity to defend the proceeding.

Parness, J. P., Sandifer and Ostrau, JJ., concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Order entered July 16, 1986 reversed, with $10 costs, the motion by respondent John Chaney to vacate the order of contempt entered on default on January 23, 1985 is granted, [1080]*1080and matter remanded to the court below for further proceedings.

Section 756 of the Judiciary Law provides, inter alia, that "unless otherwise ordered by the court”, the moving papers on an application to punish for contempt must be served no less than 10 days before the time the application is noticed to be heard. The court (Levister, J.) authorized short service in this matter, although it is not clear from the record why expedition was deemed necessary in light of the fact that the order respondent purportedly violated had been rendered more than one year earlier. In any event, respondent was served (under CPLR 308 [4]) only two days prior to the contempt hearing, and was unable to appear because he was outside the jurisdiction at the time. An application for an adjournment was denied. In this posture, and given the substantial penalties assessed against respondent, the order of contempt entered on default should be vacated so that respondent will have a meaningful opportunity to defend the proceeding.

Parness, J. P., Sandifer and Ostrau, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 Misc. 2d 1079, 526 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1988 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/department-of-housing-preservation-development-v-chaney-nyappterm-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack