Sream, Inc. v. Sha Sultana Inc. ( 2020 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 18-cv-61743-BLOOM/Valle SREAM, INC. and ROOR INTERNATIONAL BV, Plaintiffs, v. SHA SULTANA INC. d/b/a TOBACCO TOWN, Defendant. _________________________/ ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Sream, Inc. and Roor International BV’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Renewed Motion for Order to Show Cause, ECF No. [20] (“Motion”), filed on August 10, 2020. Plaintiffs request that this Court enter an order to show cause why Asif Virani, as the owner of Defendant Sha Sultana, Inc. d/b/a Tobacco Town (“Defendant”), should not be held in civil contempt for failing to appear at his deposition, despite receiving proper notice and being duly served with a subpoena deuces tecum in aid of execution. The Court ordered Defendant to respond to the Motion by no later than August 18, 2020, ECF No. [21], but Defendant failed to timely do so. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69(a) “provides the process by which a judgment creditor can enforce a money judgment and authorizes post judgment discovery in aid of execution of that judgment.” In re Clerici, 481 F.3d 1324, 1336 (11th Cir. 2007). This Rule “provides that the discovery procedures outlined in Rules 26 through 37 apply to discovery is sought from a party in aid of execution.” MAC Funding Corp. v. ASAP Graphics, Inc., No. 08-mc-61785, 2009 WL 1564236, at *1 (S.D. Fla. June 3, 2009) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 69(a)(2)). “Thus, Defendants have a duty to appear for examination upon being duly served with a Notice of taking deposition, and proper service under Rule 45 is not an issue.” Id. Moreover, “[a] court may impose . . . civil contempt charges on a person who fails to comply with a subpoena duces tecum.” In re Adler, Coleman Clearing Corp., No. 06-80157-CIV, 2007 WL 9707008, at *4 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2007) (citing Nilva v. United States, 352 U.S. 385, 392 (1957)), report and recommendation adopted, No. 06-80157-CIV, 2007 WL 9707005 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 8, 2007). “Civil contempt charges are used to enforce compliance with a court’s order or to compensate a wronged party.” Id. (citing United States v. Rizzo, 539 F.2d 458, 463 (5th Cir. 1976)). “Civil contempt proceedings can be brought pursuant to Rule 45(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which states that ‘[f]ailure by any person without adequate excuse to obey a subpoena served upon that person may be deemed a contempt of the court from which the subpoena was issued.’” Id. Ultimately, civil contempt charges are “designed to compel future compliance with a court order, are considered to be coercive and avoidable through obedience, and thus may be imposed in an ordinary civil proceeding upon notice and an opportunity to be heard.” Int’l Union, United Mine Workers of Am. v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821, 827 (1994). Upon review of the record in this case, the Court finds no adequate reason for why Mr. Virani should not appear for the deposition. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Motion, ECF No. [20], is GRANTED in part. 2. Mr. Asif Virani shall appear before this Court via Zoom video conference on September 1, 2020, at 1:00 p.m., to show cause why he should not be compelled to obey the Subpoena Duces Tecum with Deposition in Aid of Execution, ECF No. [20-1] at 1, which was served on him on January 16, 2020, see id. at 9. a. The link to join the Zoom videoconference is: https://www.zoomgov.com/j/1603147784?pwd=T0dnZ3BaOU1ZK25YeHNV R1lIMW15dz09. Alternatively, the Meeting ID for this hearing is 160 314 7784 and the password is 707017. 3. Mr. Virani may purge himself of the requirement to appear before the undersigned by contacting Plaintiffs’ counsel and appearing for a deposition before September 1, 2020. Contact information for Plaintiffs’ counsel is as follows: Jamie Alan Sasson The Ticktin Law Group, PLLC. 270 SW Natura Avenue Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441 Serv513@LegalBrains.com JSasson@LegalBrains.com Telephone: (954) 570-6757 Alternate Telephone: (561) 232-2222 Facsimile: 954-418-7120 4. Prior to September 1, 2020, at 1:00 p.m., Plaintiffs’ counsel shall advise the Court as to whether Mr. Virani has purged himself of the need to appear before this Court. 5. By no later than August 24, 2020, Plaintiffs shall serve this Order upon Mr. Asif Virani at the following address: SHA SULTANA INC. d/b/a TABACCO TOWN R/A Asif Virani 2500 E Hallandale Beach Blvd. Suite LA Hallandale, Florida 33009 Case No. 18-cv-61743-BLOOM/Valle DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on August 19, 2020. BETH BLOOM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: Counsel of Record