Gertrude L. Moore, Plaintiff, v. Henry G. Moore, Defendant

Gertrude L. Moore, Plaintiff, v. Henry G. Moore, Defendant. (No. 2.) First Department, December 23, 1910. Stay — judgment for alimony — order punishing for contempt — removal of defendant to foreign State — injury to defendant’s health. Proceedings to enforce a foreign judgment requiring a defendant to pay alimony and also to enforce an order punishing him for contempt in failing to obey the judgment will not be stayed, bécause New Jersey, whither he has removed to escape the jurisdiction of the court, is injurious to his health, especially where he repudiates a stipulation of his former counsel whereby he agreed to pay a certain sum each month to be applied on the judgment. Motion for, a stay. Abraham SnydeoJeer, for the motion. Morgan J. O'Brien^ opposed; [MAJORITY — Per Curiam : ■] Per Curiam : ■ This is a motion to stay the plaintiff’s proceeding to enforce a judgment requiring the defendant to pay to the plaintiff certain' sums of money directed to be paid by a foreign .judgment, and an order committing the defendant for contempt for refusing to comply with the provisions of the judgment. . It appears from the moving papers that since the entry of this order committing the defendant for contempt, he has removed from the State of New York to the State of New Jersey ; that he is there living in a place which, he says, is injurious to his health, and that he is advised by his physicians that his health is injured because of the lack of the comforts in his home in New York. The defendant is voluntarily in New Jersey to avoid complying. with the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of New York, and the fact that such voluntary residence is injurious to his health is no reason why the orders and judgments of. the' Supreme Court of the State of New York should be treated with contempt. There is nothing to prevent the defendant from returning to New York, except his refusal to comply with the judgments of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. It also appears that on a motion at the Special Term to . stay, the proceedings, the defendant’s' then counsel entered into a stipulation by which he was to pay $1,000 a month to a receiver appointed by this court, to be applied upon the amount adjudged due to the plaintiff, but that he has refused to comply with that stipulation, and now alleges that his counsel was not authorized to make it. He now offers to pay $333.33 a month, until the decision of the appeal, but there is no reason to suppose that he would not repudiate this promise with the same alacrity as was shown regarding his past obligations. ' There was no justification for the application for a stay of proceedings, and the motion is denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Miller and Dow-ling, JJ. Motion for stay denied, with ten dollars costs. Settle order on notice.