Hyperlawhypertext legal database Goldberger v. Tack 108 N.Y.S. 1047

← Cases

Goldberger v. Tack

108 N.Y.S. 1047 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1908-03-05 English

Delivered by MacEEAN, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 1047
GOLDBERGER v. TACK.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
March 5, 1908.)

Headnote

Execution—Supplementary Proceedings—Disobedience op Order —Contempt.
In proceedings to adjudge a judgment debtor guilty of contempt for disbursing money subsequent to a restraining order served upon him, where his testimony does not show that the money was personal earnings, which were exempt under Code Civ. Proc. § 2463, he will be held guilty.
(Ed. Note.—Eor cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 21, Execution, § 1199.]
Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
Morris Tack was adjudged guilty of contempt for violating an order restraining him from disposing of property subject to execution, and appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before GIEDERSEEEVE, P. J., and BISCHOFE and MacEEAN, JJ.
Robert E. Turk, for appellant.
Theodore Prince, for respondent.

To relieve the defendant, judgment debtor, from the contempt in which he has been held by the court below for violation of an order, heretofore served upon him, forbidding him to dispose “of the property belonging to him not exempt by law from execution, or in any manner to interfere therewith, until further order in the premises,” it should appear that the moneys received and disbursed by him subsequent to the restraining order served upon him were exempt from restraint under the provisions of section 2463, Code of Civil Procedure. The testimony of the defendant debtor himself does not disclose that said moneys were earned for personal services, and so he was rightly held to be in contempt. Mulford v. Gibbs, 9 App. Div. 490 , 41 N. Y. Supp. 273 ; Id., 13 App. Div. 624 , 42 N. Y. Supp. 1129 , which was affirmed without opinion in 153 N. Y. 656 , 47 N. E. 1109 .

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.

Cases cited