ALPERT v. ALPERT

In this litigation to enforce a longstanding money judgment, defendant judgment debtor Zane Alpert was properly held in civil contempt upon evidence overwhelmingly demonstrating his willful and contumacious refusal to comply with a court order mandating payments toward satisfaction of the judgment, and thereupon appropriately fined pursuant to Judiciary Law § 773 in the amount of the legal fees and expenses incurred by plaintiffs in the contempt proceeding ( see, Pace Adv. Agency v. Manhattan Pac. Mgt. Co., 237 A.D.2d 131; Holskin v. 22 Prince St. Assocs., 178 A.D.2d 347).

Defendant was not entitled to assignment of counsel since he was clearly not indigent (Judiciary Law § 770).

We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them to be unpersuasive.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Tom, Lerner and Buckley, JJ.