Court Concludes Defendant Purged Himself Of Criminal Contempt

Posted: August 15, 2025 / Written by: Jeffrey M. Eilender, Thomas A. Kissane, Samuel L. Butt, Joshua Wurtzel, Channing J. Turner / Categories Commercial, Contempt

Court Concludes Defendant Purged Himself Of Criminal Contempt

On July 1, 2025, Justice Joel M. Cohen determined that Defendant purged himself of criminal contempt in Valley National Bank v. Tarzan Cab Corp., Index No. 655249/2020. In March, the Court granted plaintiff’s motion for civil contempt and provisionally granted the motion for criminal contempt against Defendant Sami Itshaik. The Court provided Defendant leave to purge himself of criminal contempt by making a filing that complied with the Court’s prior order. In concluding Itshaik had purged the criminal contempt, the Court explained:

Unlike civil contempt, which “is established, regardless of the contemnor's motive, when disobedience of the court's order ‘defeats, impairs, impedes, or prejudices the rights or remedies of a party’" (El-Dehdan v El-Dehdan, 26 NY3d 19, 35, 41 NE3d 340, 350 [2015]), criminal contempt “requires a finding of willful disobedience” of “a court’s lawful mandate” (Zodkevitch v Feibush, 17 Misc 3d 1106(A), 851 NYS2d 62 [Sup Ct 2007]). "Knowingly failing to comply with a court order gives rise to an inference of willfulness" (Dalessio v Kressler, 6 AD3d 57, 66, 773 NYS2d 434, 440 [2d Dept 2004]).

Here, Amit Itshaik [Defendant’s son] has provided sufficient evidence to show why Defendant did not appear in this action in response to Court orders. The record provides evidence that Defendant did not know about the contempt motions against him because (1) he had relocated to Florida by the time service of the Orders to Show cause for Contempt was effectuated at his former New York residential address; (2) the two attorneys who received notice of the Orders to Show Cause did not inform him about them; and (3) he has been experiencing a cognitive decline in recent years. These facts do not support a finding of “willful disobedience” of this Court’s orders sufficient to warrant a finding of criminal contempt.

Contact the Commercial Division Blog Committee at commercialdivisionblog@schlamstone.com if you or a client have questions concerning contempt.