You are here: / / Civil Contempt Finding Appropriate—Defendant Failed to Comply With...
, ,

Civil Contempt Finding Appropriate—Defendant Failed to Comply With Order to Pay Attorney’s Fees

The Second Department explained the criteria for civil contempt.  The order which was not complied with here required defendant to pay attorney’s fees in a divorce proceeding:

To prevail on a motion to punish for civil contempt, the movant must establish (1) that a lawful order of the court, clearly expressing an unequivocal mandate, was in effect, (2) that the order was disobeyed and the party disobeying the order had knowledge of its terms, and (3) that the movant was prejudiced by the offending conduct” … . The movant has the burden of proving contempt by clear and convincing evidence … . Here, where it is undisputed that the defendant did not comply with the clear mandate of the court’s order …, the plaintiff met his burden on the motion … . Moreover, under the circumstances of this case, less drastic enforcement measures than seeking to hold the defendant in contempt would have been ineffectual … . Hayes v Barroga-Hayes, 2014 NY Slip Op 03488, 2nd Dept 5-14-14

 

You might also like
In Consolidated Actions Started in Different Counties, the County Where the First Action Was Brought is the Proper Venue
Appeal, Rather than a Motion to Vacate a Default Judgment, Is the Proper Remedy Where a Party Appears to Contest Motion to Enter a Default Judgment
Labor Law 200 Action Is Not Based Upon Supervision or Control of Plaintiff’s Work, But Rather on the Property Owner’s Creation or Failure to Remedy a Dangerous Condition
BURGLARY SECOND IS AN INCLUSORY CONCURRENT COUNT OF BURGLARY SECOND AS A SEXUALLY MOTIVATED FELONY (SECOND DEPT).
Vacation of a Note of Issue Does Not Constitute Marking Off the Calendar/One Year Automatic Dismissal Did Not Apply
ALTHOUGH DEFENDANT IN THIS FORECLOSURE ACTION DID NOT ASSERT THE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF LACK OF STANDING AND LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION IN THE ANSWER, THE DEFENSES WERE NOT WAIVED AND THE MOTION TO AMEND THE ANSWER SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED; EVEN THOUGH THE STATUTE PROVIDING THAT THE LACK OF STANDING DEFENSE WAS NOT WAIVED WAS NOT ENACTED AT THE TIME THE MOTION WAS DECIDED, THE APPELLATE COURT CAN APPLY THE LAW AS IT EXISTS AT THE TIME OF THE APPELLATE DECISION (SECOND DEPT).
CRITERIA FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED UPON RES IPSA LOQUITUR EXPLAINED, NOT MET HERE.
THE COVID EXECUTIVE ORDERS TOLLING STATUTES OF LIMITATIONS EXTENDED THE DEADLINE FOR FILING ACTIONS UNDER THE CHILD VICTIMS ACT UNTIL NOVEMBER 12, 2021 (SECOND DEPT). ​

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Forum Selection Clause in Nursing Home Admission Agreement Should Have Been... Rape and Incest Counts Rendered Indictment Multiplicitous/Trial Testimony Rendered...