Opinion
248 A.D.2d 516 669 N.Y.S.2d 900 Audrey MANES, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Morton MANES, et al., Defendants; Ruth M. Pollack, Nonparty Appellant. 1998-02540 Supreme Court of New York, Second Department March 16, 1998.
Pollacks&s Kotler, Mineola (Ruth M. Pollack, nonparty appellant pro se, and Georgia K. McMillen, of counsel), for nonparty appellant.
Morans&s Brodrick, Garden City (Leslie K. Rothkopf, of counsel), for plaintiff-respondent.
In an action, inter alia, to rescind a separation agreement, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kohn, J.), dated November 22, 1996, which, after a hearing, held Ruth M. Pollack in contempt of an order of the same court, dated May 7, 1996, and imposed a fine of $6,999.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Notwithstanding the fact that the order dated May 7, 1996, was erroneous (see, Manes v. Manes, --- A.D.2d ----, --- N.Y.S.2d ---- [App.Div. Docket No. 96-04701, decided herewith] ), the Supreme Court properly held Ruth M. Pollack in contempt for her initial refusal to comply with that order. A court may punish for civil contempt any disobedience to a lawful judicial order expressing an unequivocal mandate, no matter how erroneous (see, Matter of Balter v. Regan, 63 N.Y.2d 630, 631, 479 N.Y.S.2d 506, 468 N.E.2d 688, cert. denied 469 U.S. 934, 105 S.Ct. 333, 83 L.Ed.2d 269; Matter of Village of St. Johnsville v. Triumpho, 220 A.D.2d 847, 848, 632 N.Y.S.2d 263), whenever the rights or remedies of a party to a civil action may be defeated, impaired, impeded or prejudiced (see, Judiciary Law § 753[A][3]; Matter of Department of Envtl. Protection of City of N.Y. v. Department of Envtl. Conservation of State of N.Y., 70 N.Y.2d 233, 239-240, 519 N.Y.S.2d 539, 513 N.E.2d 706; Matter of McCormick v. Axelrod, 59 N.Y.2d 574, 583, 466 N.Y.S.2d 279, 453 N.E.2d 508). Here, it is not disputed that the appellant initially disobeyed the order dated May 7, 1996. Further, the refusal of Ruth Pollack to comply with that order impeded the plaintiff's ability to proceed with the underlying litigation.
Because there was no evidence of actual loss or injury to the plaintiff, the court properly imposed a fine equal to the amount of her costs and expenses, including attorney's fees (see, Judiciary Law § 773; Glennon v. Mayo, 174 A.D.2d 600, 571 N.Y.S.2d 307; Gordon v. Janover, 121 A.D.2d 599, 503 N.Y.S.2d 860).
The remaining contentions are without merit.
MANGANO, P.J., and BRACKEN, COPERTINO and SANTUCCI, JJ., concur.