Gretz v. Gretz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gretz v. Gretz

298 A.D.2d 497, 748 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9966

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 21, 2002·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dillon, J.), dated June 4, 2001, as granted the defendant’s motion to punish her for civil contempt and directed her incarceration for a period of seven days, commencing on June 25, 2001. By decision and order of this Court dated June 26, 2001, enforcement of the order dated June 4, 2001, was stayed pending determination of the appeal.

Ordered that the order is modified by adding thereto a provision suspending the sentence of seven days imprisonment; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Under the circumstances of this case, the imposition of a seven-day jail sentence for violating the temporary order of protection was excessive. Accordingly, we substitute our discretion for that of the Supreme Court and impose a suspended sentence (see generally Matter of Lewin v Lewin, 124 AD2d 730). Feuerstein, J.P., O’Brien, Townes and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dillon, J.), dated June 4, 2001, as granted the defendant’s motion to punish her for civil contempt and directed her incarceration for a period of seven days, commencing on June 25, 2001. By decision and order of this Court dated June 26, 2001, enforcement of the order dated June 4, 2001, was stayed pending determination of the appeal.

Ordered that the order is modified by adding thereto a provision suspending the sentence of seven days imprisonment; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Under the circumstances of this case, the imposition of a seven-day jail sentence for violating the temporary order of protection was excessive. Accordingly, we substitute our discretion for that of the Supreme Court and impose a suspended sentence (see generally Matter of Lewin v Lewin, 124 AD2d 730). Feuerstein, J.P., O’Brien, Townes and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Gretz v. Gretz, 298 A.D.2d 497, 748 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9966 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

298 A.D.2d 497 (Gretz v. Gretz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related