Tuff & Rumble Management, Inc. v. Landmark Distributors, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tuff & Rumble Management, Inc. v. Landmark Distributors, Inc.

262 A.D.2d 217, 692 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7443

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

DecidedJune 22, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D.2d 217 (Tuff & Rumble Management, Inc. v. Landmark Distributors, Inc.) 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

Tuff & Rumble Management, Inc. v. Landmark Distributors, Inc., 262 A.D.2d 217, 692 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7443 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Resettled order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered December 5, 1997, which granted plaintiff’s motion to hold nonparty outgoing attorney Shore in contempt of court for failing to turn over client files pursuant to court order, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The IAS Court had jurisdiction to issue the subject resettled order holding nonparty outgoing attorney Shore in contempt of court for failing to turn over client files in accordance with a prior order of the same court and Justice, since the original order holding Shore in contempt for such conduct was validly entered prior to the termination of the litigation in which the flouted turnover order was issued. The resettled contempt order did not vary from the original contempt order in any presently relevant way. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Resettled order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered December 5, 1997, which granted plaintiff’s motion to hold nonparty outgoing attorney Shore in contempt of court for failing to turn over client files pursuant to court order, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The IAS Court had jurisdiction to issue the subject resettled order holding nonparty outgoing attorney Shore in contempt of court for failing to turn over client files in accordance with a prior order of the same court and Justice, since the original order holding Shore in contempt for such conduct was validly entered prior to the termination of the litigation in which the flouted turnover order was issued. The resettled contempt order did not vary from the original contempt order in any presently relevant way. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 217, 692 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tuff-rumble-management-inc-v-landmark-distributors-inc-nyappdiv-1999.