(DOWNLOAD) "Bennett Brothers v. Floyd Bennett Farmers Market Corporation Et Al." by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Bennett Brothers v. Floyd Bennett Farmers Market Corporation Et Al.
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 12, 1962
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 59 KB
Description
Order, entered on February 28, 1962, modified on the law and on the facts to reduce the fine imposed by the fourth ordering paragraph to the sum of $250, together with the sum of $500 costs and expenses, making a total fine of $750, with said ordering paragraph modified accordingly; and to strike the last decretal paragraph; and otherwise affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. We agree, for the reasons set forth in the memorandum of Mr. Justice STEVENS, that the fine of $1,000 should be reduced to $250 and we further agree with him that the last decretal paragraph must be stricken. However, in addition to the fine of $250, the court had the power to include in the fine a sum ""not exceeding the amount of complainant's costs and expenses"". (Judiciary Law, § 773.) Reasonable counsel fees in the matter of the application to punish the defendants for contempt may be properly included as an item of the ""complainant's costs and expenses"" (21 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice, p. 332; also People ex rel. Garbutt v. Rochester & State Line R.R.Co., 76 N. Y. 294; Dollard v. Koronsky, 61 Misc. 392, affd. 133 App. Div. 896; Malmud v. Blackman, 177 Misc. 162, PECORA, J.) Such costs and expenses, including reasonable counsel fees, may be reasonably estimated on the papers and proceedings before the court and need not be precisely proved. (See Mathieson Chem. Corp. v. Lindemann Pharmacy, 8 A.D.2d 802.) Here, in our opinion, the nature of the proceedings and the papers in the record amply support the fine of $500 for costs and expenses. Concur - Rabin, J.P., McNally and Eager, JJ.; Valente and Stevens, JJ., dissent in part in the following memorandum by Stevens, J.: In my view the order appealed from should be modified on the law to strike the last decretal paragraph, to strike the amount fixed for costs and expenses with leave to plaintiff to make application at Special Term to prove and recover therefor, to reduce the fine imposed to $250, and should be otherwise affirmed, with costs to respondent. Since the record is barren of proof of actual loss or injury to the plaintiff, that provision of section 773 of the Judiciary Law which provides for the imposition of a fine sufficient to indemnify the aggrieved party where actual loss or injury is proved is not
 "Bennett Brothers v. Floyd Bennett Farmers Market Corporation Et Al." by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}