Ricardo Castro, et al. v. AABC Construction, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------- X : RICARDO CASTRO, et al., : : Plaintiffs, : : 17-CV-1205 (VSB) - against - : : ORDER AABC CONSTRUCTION, et al., : Defendants. : : --------------------------------------------------------- X

VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: On January 16, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. I held an Order to Show Cause Hearing. In accordance with my comments at the hearing, the Plaintiffs file a reply to Defendant Sheeri’s Response Declaration by January 30, 2026. The reply will address the legal basis for holding Defendants’ conduct in alleged violation of a post-judgment information subpoena issued under CPLR, (Doc. 202–3), and a post-judgment deposition subpoena issued under Fed. R. Civ. Pr. 45, (202–5), as predicates to support a finding of civil contempt under the operative test used by courts in the District. See S.E.C. v. Oxford Cap. Sec., Inc., 794 F. Supp. 104, 106 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (“A court may hold a party in civil contempt only when (1) the order the party allegedly failed to comply with is clear and unambiguous, (2) the proof of noncompliance is clear and convincing, and (3) the party has not diligently attempted in a reasonable manner to comply.” (citing EEOC v. Local 638, Local 28 of Sheet Metal Workers’ Int’l Ass’n, 753 F.2d 1172, 1178 (2d Cir.1985), aff’d, 478 U.S. 421 (1986))). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 21, 2026 New York, New York

Vernon S. Broderick United States District Judge