Parris v. Pappas et al
Filing
327
ORDER RE: March 18, 2018 Telephone Conference. Signed by Judge Holly B. Fitzsimmons on 3/20/18.(Esposito, A.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
:
:
:
: Civil No. 3:10CV1128 (WWE)
:
:
:
:
DONNA PARRIS
v.
CHARLES PAPPAS, ET AL
ORDER
On October 5, 2017, this Court granted plaintiff’s renewed
Motion for Sanctions and Finding for Contempt and ordered
Defendant Charles Pappas to pay $800 a month, no later
than the 10th of each month, to Attorney Greg
Kirschner, Trustee for Ms. Parris. Defendant will file
with the Court under seal a proof of payment together
with a sworn and notarized monthly statement of income
and expenses, along with a copy of his monthly bank
statement. This submission will be provided by the 15th
of each month with a copy to plaintiff’s counsel.
[Doc. #312 at 15, affirmed and adopted on Jan. 3, 2018,
Doc. #320]. On March 8, 2018, plaintiff filed a Motion for
Finding of Contempt, seeking an order finding Pappas in
contempt and confining him until such time as Pappas purges
his contempt. [Doc. #322]. A telephone conference was held
on March 20, 2018. Defendant’s counsel sought leave to
comply with the reporting requirement. The Court granted
defendant leave to file documents required by the Court’s
ruling, on or before March 30, 2018. After review of the
filings, a hearing will be set to permit plaintiff to
1
examine defendant Pappas under oath regarding his income
and expenses and his ability to pay, and to hear defendant
on why an order of contempt should not enter for
defendant’s noncompliance with the Court’s order of October
5, 2017. Should defendant be found in contempt, the Court
will consider appropriate sanctions up to and including
incarceration to compel compliance.
SO ORDERED at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 20th day of March 2018.
/s/
_____________
HOLLY B. FITZSIMMONS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?