Fusik v. Scholl

Order entered July 18, 1935, denying plaintiff’s motion to punish defendant for contempt for. alleged failure to comply with a judgment directing the defendant to do certain things with respect to a certain mechanical refrigeration apparatus, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The finding that the judgment was complied with concludes the plaintiff, by reason of its being based on a personal inspection by the court. (Braisted v. Brooklyn & R. B. R. R. Co., 46 App. Div. 204; Haber v. Paramount Ice Corporation, 239 id. 324, 326; affd., 264 N. Y. 98; Gucker v. Lewis, 249 App.…