Legal Opinion

Columbia Federal Savings Bank v. Buyokas

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 16, 1988Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Arthur W. Lonschein, J.

This application to punish the judgment debtor for contempt presents the novel question of whether the movant can introduce a fatal defect into his papers by giving the respondent too much advance notice. For the reasons stated below, the court concludes that too much notice is just as fatal as too little, and denies the motion without prejudice.

Procedure on a contempt motion is governed by Judiciary Law § 756, which provides that "unless * * * ordered by the *786court, the moving papers shall be served no less than ten and no more than thirty days…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Murrin v. MurrinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  2. In re the Estate of DevineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  3. Continental Bank v. MoscatielloNew York Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. ChaneyAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API