Socialistic Co-operative Publishing Ass'n v. Kuhn
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, Henry Kuhn and others, from an ■order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 6th day of April, 1900, striking out their answer for a ■contempt of court.
1Opinion of the Court
McLaughlin, J.:
There is no doubt that the court has the power by way of punishment to strike out an answer of a defendant for a contempt of court. This was'’settled, if any doubt theretofore existed, by the recent decision of Devlin v. Hinman (161 N. Y. 115). But in a civil action before a défendant can be punished for a contempt of court, either by the imposition of a fine or the striking out of his answer, there must first be an adjudication that he is not only guilty of á contempt of court, but that his act — of which the opposing party complains—not only has a tendency to, but actually…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Devlin v. . HinmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Fischer v. . RaabNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- First Nat. Bank v. FitzpatrickNew York Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by7 opinions
- People ex rel. Springs v. ReidAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Schweig v. SchweigAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
- Ryan v. RyanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
- Mutual Milk & Cream Co. v. TietjenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
- Dunlop v. MulryNew York Supreme Court · 1903
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.