Rothbard v. Brennan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rothbard v. Brennan

263 A.D. 991, 33 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7795

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

DecidedMarch 2, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D. 991 (Rothbard v. Brennan) 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

Rothbard v. Brennan, 263 A.D. 991, 33 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7795 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to

review an order adjudging petitioner guilty of two criminal contempts and fining him $200 for the first contempt and $250 for the second contempt. Order modified on the facts as follows: (1) By striking out the provisions adjudging petitioner guilty of the first contempt and fining him therefor; (2) by striking out the fine of $250 imposed for the second contempt and substituting therefor a provision censuring him for his contumacious conduct in connection with such contempt; and (3) by striking out the provisions relating to the non-payment of the fines imposed and the penalties therefor. As so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. Under the circumstances disclosed there is no basis for holding petitioner guilty of the first contempt charged. The petitioner clearly was guilty of the second contempt charged when he rejoined: “ You can fine me five hundred.” However, in the light of the events which occurred during the trial before this incident, petitioner’s punishment should be limited to a censure. Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to

review an order adjudging petitioner guilty of two criminal contempts and fining him $200 for the first contempt and $250 for the second contempt. Order modified on the facts as follows: (1) By striking out the provisions adjudging petitioner guilty of the first contempt and fining him therefor; (2) by striking out the fine of $250 imposed for the second contempt and substituting therefor a provision censuring him for his contumacious conduct in connection with such contempt; and (3) by striking out the provisions relating to the non-payment of the fines imposed and the penalties therefor. As so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. Under the circumstances disclosed there is no basis for holding petitioner guilty of the first contempt charged. The petitioner clearly was guilty of the second contempt charged when he rejoined: “ You can fine me five hundred.” However, in the light of the events which occurred during the trial before this incident, petitioner’s punishment should be limited to a censure. Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 991, 33 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rothbard-v-brennan-nyappdiv-1942.