U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1970

Kolodner v. Harris

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided April 22, 1970

424 F.2d 1071 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Harry A. Margolis,. New York City and Louis J. Sagner, Baltimore, Md., on brief for appellant., Leon H. A. Pierson and Joseph Rosen-thal, Baltimore, Md., on brief, for appel-lee.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Kolodner v. Harris (4th Cir. 1970)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

In this appeal from the district court’s affirmance of the referee’s refusal to hold the appellee in contempt for violation of a turnover order, we find oral argument unnecessary and summarily affirm. Under the evidence presented, the referee and the district court could find that the appellee is presently incapable of complying with the order by any other means than reconstruction of the inventory demanded. The district court’s conclusion that the appellee is not in contempt was, therefore, warranted. Mag-gio v. Zeitz, 333 U.S. 56, 69, 68 S.Ct. 401, 92 L.Ed. 476 (1948).

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.