Opinion
November 7, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.).
Ordered that the order entered June 16, 1993, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to hold the plaintiff in civil contempt for violating the visitation provisions of its June 22, 1989, order (see, Judiciary Law § 753). The Supreme Court properly directed that the plaintiff fully comply with the visitation provisions of its order instead of holding him in contempt. We note that future noncompliance by the plaintiff may provide a basis for a finding of civil contempt (see, Gagliardo v. Gagliardo, 151 A.D.2d 720, 721; Fuerst v Fuerst, 131 A.D.2d 426, 427; Kampf v. Worth, 108 A.D.2d 841).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit, as is the plaintiff's request for sanctions with regard to this appeal (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1) Sullivan, J.P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.