United States of America v. Waterbury et al, No. 5:2018cv00440 - Document 84 (N.D.N.Y 2021)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the Plaintiffs Motion for Contempt and Sanctions (Dkt. No. 70) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants are held in contempt for violating the Decree; and it is fur ther ORDERED that Defendants are sanctioned and ordered to pay Plaintiff a total sum of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00) as directed herein to Plaintiff no later than thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this Decision and Order; and i t is further ORDERED that Defendants shall provide to Plaintiff no later than thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this order a complete and detailed accounting, sworn to by Defendants Carol and Douglas Waterbury, of all leases, rental income, security deposits, and expenses related to all of the Morrisville and Oswego, New York properties, (Dkt. No. 63, Appx A), from March 3, 2020, through the date of this Decision and Order; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants cease performing any property management responsibilities at the Morrisville and Oswego properties, (Dkt. No. 63, Appx A), including but not limited to collecting rent and security deposits and executing leases; Defendants must refer all tenants and applicants to theInde pendent Manager; and Defendants must cease interfering with the Independent Manager; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion is DENIED in all other respects including issuing any further injunctive relief at this time. Signed by U.S. District Judge Mae A. D'Agostino on 9/22/21. (ban)

Download PDF
Dockets.Justia.com MAE A. D’AGOSTINO, DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION United States of America v. Waterbury et al Doc. 84 II. BACKGROUND See generally See generally 1 2 Id. 3 4 Id. i.e. Id. Id. III. LEGAL STANDARD Chambers v. NASCO, Inc. Id King v. Allied Vision, Ltd., Id. Vuitton et Fils S.A. v. Carousel Handbags Manhattan Indus., Inc. v. Sweater Bee by Banff, Ltd. Vuitton et Fils S.A. IV. DISCUSSION United States v. Armour & Co. See generally Blandon v. Barr Levin v. Tiber Holding Corp. A. Alleged Violations Related to Retaining the Independent Property Manager See, e.g., Latino Officers Ass’n v. City of New York B. aff’d Alleged Violations Related to Property Management Issues i.e., Id. Id. Id. 1. Morrisville Property See generally see also Id. 5 Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. See King 2. Oswego Properties See Id. Id. Id. See 6 See Perez v. Danbury Hosp. King see C. Alleged Violations Related to Defendant Douglas Waterbury’s Conduct Id. Id. Id. Id. 7 Id. See Id. Id. V. CONCLUSION ORDERED GRANTED ORDERED ORDERED ORDERED ORDERED DENIED ORDERED IT IS SO ORDERED. DENIED

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.