United States District Court, S.D. New York
September 15, 2004.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
EUGENE CHUSID, Defendant.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: LEWIS KAPLAN, District Judge
Plaintiff currently is imprisoned for civil contempt in
consequence of his failure to comply with this Court's order of
July 17, 2001, which ordered him to pay restitution and fines.
The contempt order was affirmed by the Court of Appeals on June
15, 2004. United States v. Chusid, 372 F.3d 113 (2d Cir. 2004).
Chusid now moves for an order releasing him from custody or for
other relief, arguing among other things that he has done
everything he can do to comply with the Court's order.
It is common ground that a civil contempt order is a coercive
device. "`When it becomes obvious that sanctions are not going to
compel compliance, they lose their remedial characteristics and
take on more of the nature of punishment.'" Simkin v. United
States, 715 F.2d 34, 36-37 (2d Cir. 1983) (quoting Soobzokov v.
CBS, Inc., 642 F.2d 28, 31 (2d Cir. 1981)). At such time,
further imprisonment would be improper. "But," as the government
argues, "[t]hat time has not arrived for Chusid," Gov't Mem. 5,
substantially for the reasons set forth in the government's
memorandum of law. In a nutshell, this Court is far from
persuaded either that Chusid lacks the capacity to comply with
the order or that further incarceration will not coerce him into
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.