Jeremias was not named in the September 22, 2014 order allegedly violated and this order was
not served upon him. Thus, there is no basis to punish Jeremias for contempt thereof (see Korea Chosun Daily Times, Inc. v
Dough Boy Donuts Corp, 129 AD3d 918 [2015]; cf. Citibank, N.A. v Anthony
Lincoln-Mercury, 86 AD2d 828 [1982]).
With respect to the Civil Court's use of the word "moot" in denying the branch of tenant's
motion seeking to punish landlord (and Jeremias) for contempt in violating the September 22,
2014 order, we note that that branch of the motion had not been rendered "moot" in the sense that
there was no justiciable controversy to be determined. However, in the context of the particular
facts and circumstances presented before it, the Civil Court was, in effect, exercising its
discretion in finding that landlord (and Jeremias) should not be punished for contempt, a finding
with which we are in agreement.
Accordingly, the order entered March 12, 2015, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.
PESCE, P.J., WESTON and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: March 30, 2018