United States v. Schwarzbaum

District Court, S.D. Florida·Decided December 7, 2023·No. 9:18-cv-81147·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 18-cv-81147-BLOOM/Reinhart

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ISAC SCHWARZBAUM,

Defendant. _____________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the United States of America’s Opposed Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Defendant Isac Schwarzbaum Should Not Be Held in Civil Contempt, ECF No. [189], filed on September 29, 2023 (“Motion”). Therein, the Government requests that the Court issue an Order to Show Cause to Defendant Isac Schwarzbaum (“Defendant”) and require him to explain why the Court should not hold him in contempt for violating the Court’s Repatriation Order, ECF No. [176]. ECF No. [189] at 6. The Government further requests that the Court impose such sanctions as the Court deems just and proper, including, but not limited to, a monetary fine for each day Defendant fails to comply with the Repatriation Order, and incarceration. Id. The Motion was previously referred to the Honorable Bruce E. Reinhart for a Report and Recommendations (“R&R”). See ECF No. [190]. On November 7, 2023, the Magistrate Judge issued an R&R stating that the parties agreed that there was no need to conduct a show-cause hearing separate from the merits of whether Defendant was not complying with the Repatriation Order. ECF No. [196] at 3. The R&R finds that there is clear and convincing evidence that Defendant can comply with the Repatriation Order, which the R&R finds to be unambiguous, and that Defendant is nevertheless refusing to do so. Id. at 5. The R&R recommends that the Court find Defendant in civil contempt and conduct an in-person hearing to determine the proper sanction. Id. The R&R further states that the parties shall file any objections within fourteen days

of the date of service of a copy of the R&R. Id. The Government filed a notice on November 9, 2023 stating that it does not intend to file objections to the R&R. ECF No. [197] at 1. On November 13, 2023, Defendant filed a notice that he does not intend to file objections to the R&R either. ECF No. [198] at 1. Nevertheless, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record in this case and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and correct. The Court therefore agrees with the R&R’s find that Defendant has refused to comply with the Repatriation Order despite his ability to do so. Therefore, since “[c]ourts have inherent power to enforce compliance with their lawful orders through civil contempt”, see

Citronelle-Mobile Gathering, Inc. v. Watkins, 943 F.2d 1297, 1301 (11th Cir. 1991) (citing Shillitani v. United States, 384 U.S. 364, 370, 86 S. Ct. 1531, 1535, 16 L.Ed.2d 622 (1966)), the Court concludes that the Motion must be GRANTED. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The R&R, ECF No. [196], is ADOPTED; 2. The Motion, ECF No. [189], is GRANTED; and 3. The parties shall appear at Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. United States Courthouse, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida 33128, on March 1, 2024, at 9:00 Case No. 18-cv-81147-BLOOM/Reinhart

a.m. for the Court to determine the appropriate sanction for violating this Court’s Order to Repatriate Foreign Assets, ECF No. [176]. 4. A copy of this Order, together with the United States’ Motion for Order to Show Cause and exhibits, shall be served on Defendant Isac Schwarzbaum by counsel for the United States by email to Mr. Schwarzbaum’s counsel of record. 5. Proof of service done pursuant to paragraph 4, above, shall be filed with the Clerk as soon as practicable. 6. At least 14 days prior to the date of the hearing set forth above, Defendant Isac Schwarzbaum shall submit, in a writing filed with the Clerk of the Court, argument regarding the appropriate sanction. The Government may file a reply to any opposition at least 7 days prior to the date set for the hearing. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on December 6, 2023.

BETHBLOOM i ists UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: Counsel of Record

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

United States v. Schwarzbaum, (S.D. Fla. 2023).

United States v. Schwarzbaum (United States v. Schwarzbaum) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Williams v. McNeil
557 F.3d 1287 (Eleventh Circuit, 2009)
Shillitani v. United States
384 U.S. 364 (Supreme Court, 1966)
Citronelle-Mobile Gathering, Inc. v. Watkins
943 F.2d 1297 (Eleventh Circuit, 1991)