Majority
p. 1003FRANK v. PENNACCSO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department. October 17, 1916.) Argued October term, 1916, before GUY, BIJUR, and SHEARN, JJ.
Headnote
Execution <s=>43 8—Supplementary Proceedings—Contempt—Adjudication.Under Judiciary Law (Consol. Laws, c. 30) § 770, providing that if it is determined that the accused has committed the offense charged, and that it prejudiced the rights of a party to an action or proceeding, the court may make a final order directing the punishment for contempt, a,n order in supplementary proceedings not containing an adjudication of prejudice was invalid.
LEd. Note.—For other cases, see Execution, Cent. Dig. § 1201; Dee. Dig. <S=»418.]
<g^s>For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
Proceeding supplementary to execution by Louis R. Frank against Frank Pennaccso. From an order of the City Court of the City of New York adjudging defendant judgment debtor in contempt, he appeals. Order reversed, with leave to renew the motion.
Nicholas Selvaggi, of New York City, for appellant.
Maxwell Arent, of New York City, for respondent.
It is not necessary to determine the many points raised on this appeal because of the “fatal objections to the order,” in that “it does not contain the absolutely necessary adjudication” that the act for which the party is punished “was calculated to or actually did defeat, impair, impede, or prejudice the rights or remedies of the complaining party.” Guerrier v. Coleman, 135 App. Div. 46 , 119 N. Y. Supp. 895 ; Judiciary Law, § 770.
Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, with leave, however, to renew the motion in the court below. All concur.