BIELAT v. MONTROSE (1997)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Jay S. BIELAT, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Barry MONTROSE, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

Decided: November 25, 1997

Before MILONAS, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, NARDELLI, RUBIN and TOM, JJ.

Mitchell K. Aaron, for Plaintiff-Respondent. Warren Wynshaw, for Defendants-Appellants.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gans, J.), entered on or about October 4, 1996, which, insofar as appealed from, awarded costs of $100 and imposed sanctions of $150 against defendants' attorney, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The finding of frivolousness is supported by defendants' making of their motion for contempt of a nonparty witness while plaintiff's motion for a protective order challenging the subpoena served on that witness was sub judice; defendants' failure to obtain letters rogatory or a commission in seeking the deposition of a nonparty witness; and defendants' refusal to produce documents provided to them two years earlier. The written order of the court sufficiently complied with the requirements of 22 NYCRR part 130 by setting forth the objectionable conduct, the reason it was found to be frivolous, and an explanation for the modest sanction and costs imposed (see, Matter of Marsh, 207 A.D.2d 749, 616 N.Y.S.2d 962).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network