SACHDEV v. METRO RESOURCES INC

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The decision to grant a preliminary injunction is a matter ordinarily committed to the sound discretion of the court hearing the motion ( see, Doe v. Axelrod, 73 N.Y.2d 748, 750). To obtain a preliminary injunction, a party must demonstrate (1) a likelihood of ultimate success on the merits; (2) irreparable harm unless the injunction is granted; and (3) that the equities are balanced in its favor ( see, Aetna Ins. Co. v. Capasso, 75 N.Y.2d 860, 862; Doe v. Axelrod, supra, at 750). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court's decision to grant the defendants' motion for a preliminary injunction was not an improvident exercise of discretion.

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.

O'Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.