CATHEXIS VENTURES, LP
v.
MIQROTECH, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A defendant seeking release from civil contempt must prove they cannot comply, not merely that compliance takes time or that they are now willing to comply.
Defendant Meade Lewis, held in civil contempt for failing to provide ordered discovery, moved for release. Lewis argued he was in the process of produ…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Coercive Sanctions cases and more on FLexlaw
"[W]hen considering a motion to terminate a civil contempt order, 'the district court must make an individualized determination as to whether there exists a realistic possibility that the contemnor will [comply].'" Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Wellington Precious Metals, Inc., 950 F. 2d 1525, 1530–31 (11th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (alteration in the original) (quoting In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 877 F. 2d 849, 850 (11th Cir. 1989) (per curiam)). The contemnor must “prove that no such realistic possibility exists." Id. at 1530-31 (quoting Simkin v. United States, 715 F. 2d 34, 37 (2d Cir. 1983)). Until then, a court may hold the contemnor in custody "[a]s long as the judge is satisfied that the coercive sanction might yet produce its intended result.” Id. (quoting Simkin, 715 F. 2d at 37). [fn 1]
Defendant Meade Lewis seeks his immediate release from custody. Mot. for Release (Doc. 176). But Lewis has not purged his civil contempt by providing all the ordered discovery, nor has he shown that he cannot comply. Lewis's motion proves as much.
First, Lewis concedes facts that establish he has not purged, representing that his counsel is "in the process of viewing and producing" documents, Mot. for Release ¶ 4, and "will continue to supplement document production to plaintiffs['] counsel,” id. ¶ 5. Lewis also explains additional discovery that he anticipates producing, such as subpoenaed financial records. Id. ¶ 2. That the collection and production of the documents requires time does not purge Lewis of the contempt. Production purges the contempt.
Second, Lewis began producing the ordered discovery almost as soon as he was held in custody. At the hearing last week, counsel admitted that Lewis finally appreciates the gravity of the situation and intends on complying. Until that time, Lewis ignored with impunity multiple court orders spanning nearly a year. I am thus “satisfied that the coercive sanction might yet produce its intended result." See Wellington Precious Metals, 950 F. 2d at 1530-31 (quoting Simkin, 715 F. 2d at 37). As a result, Lewis's emergency motion is
DENIED.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on January 28, 2025.
Kathryn Kimball Mizelle United States District Judge
[fn 1]: Because I have already held Lewis in contempt, (Doc. 148), the defense of “inability”—that Lewis has “in good faith [made] all reasonable efforts to comply”— no longer governs. Chairs v. Burgess, 143 F. 3d 1432, 1437 (11th Cir. 1998).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Simkin v. United States, 715 F.2d 34 (2d Cir. 1983)
- Chairs v. Morgan Cnty. Sheriff Buford Burgess, 143 F.3d 1432 (11th Cir. 1998)
- Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n & the State of Fla. v. Wellington Precious Metals, Inc., 950 F.2d 1525 (11th Cir. 1992)
- In re Grand Jury Proceedings. Appeal of Joseph Howald, 877 F.2d 849 (11th Cir. 1989)