The City of New York sought to hold the defendant in contempt for violating the terms of a “so ordered” settlement stipulation. The Supreme Court declined to hold the defendant in contempt and instead sua sponte doubled the weekly penalty contained in the “so ordered” stipulation from one thousand dollars per week to two thousand dollars per week. On appeal, the Second Department reversed holding that the Supreme Court did not have the authority to modify the terms of the “so ordered” stipulation.
We Will Be There For Every Legal Obstacle You Face
Court Cannot Sua Sponte Modify So-Ordered Stipulation
On Behalf of Paykin Krieg & Adams, LLP | Jan 29, 2021 | BLOG, NEWS ARTICLE
Recent Posts
- Supreme Court Grants Permission to Pierce Family Trust to Collect Debts Owed
- Supreme Court Grants Motion to Vacate Contempt
- Second Department Upholds Denial of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim
- Supreme Court Holds Complaint May Reference Language from No Admit Settlement with Regulatory Bodies
- Supreme Court Finds Complaint Sufficiently Pled Alter Ego Claim