Wolf v. Rand

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wolf v. Rand

216 A.D.2d 99, 628 N.Y.S.2d 101, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6360

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

DecidedJune 15, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 99 (Wolf v. Rand) 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

Wolf v. Rand, 216 A.D.2d 99, 628 N.Y.S.2d 101, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6360 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.), entered on or about June 10, 1994, which denied plaintiffs motion to hold defendants in contempt of court for failure to comply with prior discovery orders, for CPLR 3126 discovery sanctions, and for monetary sanctions, unanimously modified on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to remand for the imposition of appropriate sanctions other than contempt, with costs to plaintiff.

In this case, approximately nine months transpired between the service of the motion for contempt and CPLR 3126 sanctions and the time the order appealed from was entered. During that period of time, the record indicates that there were numerous conferences, and a hearing before a Special Referee, [100]*100in addition to which, the IAS Court appointed a Receiver to take over the operation of the defendant corporations and to preserve the books and records of the corporations for plaintiff’s benefit. The IAS Court’s determination to appoint a Receiver at that time was not a sufficient remedy. Accordingly, we remand for the imposition of sanction other than contempt in addition to the appointment of a Receiver. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.), entered on or about June 10, 1994, which denied plaintiffs motion to hold defendants in contempt of court for failure to comply with prior discovery orders, for CPLR 3126 discovery sanctions, and for monetary sanctions, unanimously modified on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to remand for the imposition of appropriate sanctions other than contempt, with costs to plaintiff.

In this case, approximately nine months transpired between the service of the motion for contempt and CPLR 3126 sanctions and the time the order appealed from was entered. During that period of time, the record indicates that there were numerous conferences, and a hearing before a Special Referee, [100]*100in addition to which, the IAS Court appointed a Receiver to take over the operation of the defendant corporations and to preserve the books and records of the corporations for plaintiff’s benefit. The IAS Court’s determination to appoint a Receiver at that time was not a sufficient remedy. Accordingly, we remand for the imposition of sanction other than contempt in addition to the appointment of a Receiver. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 99, 628 N.Y.S.2d 101, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wolf-v-rand-nyappdiv-1995.