From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Melohn v. Melohn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Apr 15, 2021
193 A.D.3d 530 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

13602 Index No. 301969/17 Case No. 2019-04744

04-15-2021

Elizabeth MELOHN, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Alfonse MELOHN, Defendant–Appellant.

Morrison Cohen LLP, New York (David B. Saxe of counsel), for appellant.


Morrison Cohen LLP, New York (David B. Saxe of counsel), for appellant.

Renwick, J.P., Gische, Moulton, Mendez, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura E. Drager, J.), entered October 10, 2019, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, sua sponte imposed sanctions in the amount of $10,000 on each of the parties, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130–1.1, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remitted to the Supreme Court for proceedings consistent herewith.

Although Supreme Court has the authority to sua sponte raise the issue of sanctions pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130–1.1 [d] ( Miller v. Cruise Fantasies Ltd., 74 A.D.3d 919, 903 N.Y.S.2d 481 [2d Dept. 2010] ), the parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard before sanctions are actually imposed ( Hester v. Hester, 121 A.D.3d 645, 993 N.Y.S.2d 359 [2d Dept. 2014] ; Matter of Griffin v. Panzarin, 305 A.D.2d 601, 759 N.Y.S.2d 745 [2d Dept. 2003] ). In this case when the parties appeared before the court on October 3, 2019 it was in connection with an application to for an interim stay of an ongoing trial based upon a disputed arbitration agreement. Supreme Court raised the issue of sanctions for the first time during that appearance. The appearance was brief and mostly related to the issue of the interim stay. While Supreme Court raised valid concerns about whether the parties were wasting valuable court time, when after multiple days of trial had been completed they put before the court a disputed agreement to arbitrate the very issues that were being addressed at trial ( Gruen v. Krellenstein, 244 A.D.2d 234, 666 N.Y.S.2d 111 [1st Dept. 1997], lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 803, 677 N.Y.S.2d 73, 699 N.E.2d 433 [1998] ), the parties were not given a reasonable opportunity to address the court's concerns. We therefore reverse the sanctions and remand to the Supreme Court to give the parties an opportunity to be heard on the issue of sanctions.


Summaries of

Melohn v. Melohn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Apr 15, 2021
193 A.D.3d 530 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Melohn v. Melohn

Case Details

Full title:Elizabeth Melohn, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Alfonse Melohn…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Apr 15, 2021

Citations

193 A.D.3d 530 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
193 A.D.3d 530
2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 2344