AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges

ANDREW APPIO et al., Respondents, v. MEL LYN OFFICE SUPPLYING, Appellant.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, and the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.

To obtain a preliminary injunction, the movants must show a probability of success on the merits, danger of irreparable injury in the absence of an injunction, and a balance of the equities in their favor (see, Aetna Ins. Co. v Capasso, 75 N.Y.2d 860; Fulop v Sea Gate Assn., 216 A.D.2d 522). Since the plaintiffs could be adequately compensated by damages or could pursue relief under CPLR 6201 (3) for a provisional order of attachment, they failed to show that they would suffer irreparable injury if the injunction were not granted (see, Betesh v. Jemal, 209 A.D.2d 568; Busters Cleaning Corp. v. Frati, 180 A.D.2d 705, 706; Shapiro v. Shorenstein, 157 A.D.2d 833, 835). Thus, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Mangano, P.J., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

APPIO v. MEL LYN OFFICE SUPPLYING
(Dec 18, 1995)