Case ID: ny_143/html/0639-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of the Holly Manufacturing Company, Judgment Creditor, Respondent, v. Clarence H. Venner, Impleaded, etc., Judgment Debtor, Appellant. 
    
    (Argued June 18, 1894;
    decided June 22, 1894.)
    Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made December 15, 1893, which affirmed an order of Special Term adjudging the appellant guilty of contempt in failing to produce certain books pursuant to a subpoena duces tecum on his examination in supplementary proceedings.
    The following is the memorandum of opinion ;
    
      “ It was the province of the court below to determine the import and significance of the facts proved in the proceeding to punish the appellant for contempt. We cannot say that it was not permissible for the court to find that he had some complicity in the mysterious disappearance of the books about the same time in New York and Boston just when they were wanted. It is still open to him to relieve himself from punishment hy more satisfactory proof of his-good faith, and of his inability without any fault on his part to produce the books.
    
      “ The order should be affirmed, with costs.”
    
      Bronson Winthrop for appellant.
    
      Ba/oid Modl/ure for respondent.
    
      
       Reported below, 74 Hun, 458.
    
   Per Curiam

mem. for affirmance.

All concur.

‘Order affirmed.