From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Simens v. Darwish

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 12, 2013
104 A.D.3d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Summary

affirming finding of civil contempt, without hearing, where contempt was based on admissions and clear and convincing documentary evidence

Summary of this case from Wimbledon Fin. Master Fund, Ltd. v. Bergstein

Opinion

2013-03-12

Inez SIMENS, etc., et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. Charles DARWISH, etc., et al., Defendants–Appellants. Neal Fellenbaum, Temporary Receiver–Respondent.

Rosenfeld & Kaplan, LLP, New York (Steven M. Kaplan of counsel), for appellants. Scott F. Guardino, PLLC, Albertson (Scott F. Guardino of counsel), for Inez Simens, respondents.



Rosenfeld & Kaplan, LLP, New York (Steven M. Kaplan of counsel), for appellants. Scott F. Guardino, PLLC, Albertson (Scott F. Guardino of counsel), for Inez Simens, respondents.
Zegen & Fellenbaum, New York (Neal Fellenbaum respondent pro se).

SWEENY, J.P., MOSKOWITZ, ABDUS–SALAAM, ROMÁN, FEINMAN, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered November 7, 2011, which, to the extent appealed from, granted the motions of plaintiffs and the temporary receiver to the extent of holding defendant Charles Darwish (defendant) in civil and criminal contempt, and ordering him to pay $541,607.43 in civil fines and $500 in criminal fines, unanimously modified, on the law, to vacate the finding of criminal contempt and the $500 fine, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

The court did not give defendant sufficient notice that he was in danger of being held in criminal contempt ( see Beninati v. Beninati, 181 A.D.2d 434, 434, 580 N.Y.S.2d 346 [1st Dept. 1992], lv. dismissed80 N.Y.2d 924, 589 N.Y.S.2d 310, 602 N.E.2d 1126 [1992] ). Indeed, the court stated at the beginning of the evidentiary hearing that the hearing was to involve civil contempt only. Accordingly, the finding of criminal contempt, and the corresponding fine, must be vacated.

The court, however, correctly held defendant in civil contempt, as there was clear and convincing evidence that defendant knowingly disobeyed clear and unequivocal orders of the court, causing prejudice to plaintiffs and the temporary receiver ( Matter of McCormick v. Axelrod, 59 N.Y.2d 574, 582–583, 466 N.Y.S.2d 279, 453 N.E.2d 508 [1983] ). Defendant's argument that the court, in finding him in contempt, could not consider its own record, which included admissions by defendant that he did, in fact, commit various acts that were the subject of the contempt motions, is unavailing and unsupported by any relevant or controlling legal authority. We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Simens v. Darwish

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 12, 2013
104 A.D.3d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

affirming finding of civil contempt, without hearing, where contempt was based on admissions and clear and convincing documentary evidence

Summary of this case from Wimbledon Fin. Master Fund, Ltd. v. Bergstein
Case details for

Simens v. Darwish

Case Details

Full title:Inez SIMENS, etc., et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. Charles DARWISH…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 12, 2013

Citations

104 A.D.3d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
960 N.Y.S.2d 120
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 1501

Citing Cases

Wimbledon Fin. Master Fund, Ltd. v. Bergstein

The court denies Katzman's request for a hearing because there is no question of fact regarding his willful…

Taub v. Columbia Univ.

Civil contempt requires clear and convincing evidence that the Court's clear and unequivocal mandate was…