From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP v. OTR Media Grp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 9, 2021
192 A.D.3d 474 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

13319N Index No. 157903/18 Case No. 2020-04025

03-09-2021

In the Matter of GOETZ FITZPATRICK LLP, Petitioner–Appellant, v. OTR MEDIA GROUP, INC., Respondent–Respondent.

Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP, New York (Scott D. Simon of counsel), for appellant. Edelstein & Grossman, New York (Jonathan I. Edelstein of counsel), for respondent.


Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP, New York (Scott D. Simon of counsel), for appellant.

Edelstein & Grossman, New York (Jonathan I. Edelstein of counsel), for respondent.

Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Kapnick, Kennedy, Shulman, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lynn R. Kotler, J.), entered May 27, 2020, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied the motion of petitioner Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP (Goetz) to impose contempt sanctions personally on Aharon Noe, also known as Ari Noe, principal of respondent OTR Media Group, Inc. (OTR) for OTR's failure to respond to postjudgment subpoenas, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion to hold Noe in contempt granted, and the matter remanded for the imposition of sanctions.

This special proceeding was commenced to compel OTR to respond to an information subpoena and subpoena duces tecum (collectively, the subpoenas), served by Goetz. In an order dated October 22, 2019, Supreme Court found OTR in contempt due to its failure to respond and gave OTR an opportunity to purge that contempt. On this motion, Goetz seeks an order holding both OTR and Noe, OTR's principal, in contempt for OTR's continued failure and refusal to respond to the subpoenas. The motion court erred in failing to find Noe, OTR's president and purported sole employee, in contempt since Noe was served with the subpoenas and made assurances that OTR would comply, but has refused and failed to do so (see Matter of Wimbledon Fin. Master Fund, Ltd. v. Bergstein, 173 A.D.3d 401, 103 N.Y.S.3d 378 [1st Dept. 2019], lv dismissed 34 N.Y.3d 1152, 119 N.Y.S.3d 434, 142 N.E.3d 117[2020] ; N.A. Dev. Co. v. Jones, 99 A.D.2d 238, 239, 472 N.Y.S.2d 363 [1st Dept. 1984] ).


Summaries of

Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP v. OTR Media Grp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 9, 2021
192 A.D.3d 474 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP v. OTR Media Grp.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP, Petitioner-Appellant, v. OTR Media…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 9, 2021

Citations

192 A.D.3d 474 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
192 A.D.3d 474
2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 1374

Citing Cases

Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP v. OTR Media Grp.

The court held that it could not hold Noe in contempt, however, finding that Noe had not been properly served…