Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with costs. Injunctive relief granted plaintiff, pending this appeal, by order of this court dated March 22, 1984, is hereby vacated.
Upon this record, it is evident that Special Term properly exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff's motion. Plaintiff failed to meet her burden of demonstrating, via a prima facie evidentiary showing, the necessity of the relief she requested (CPLR 6301; Matter of Di Bona [ General Rayfin], 45 A.D.2d 696; Groh v Halloran, 86 A.D.2d 30; CPLR 6401; Nassau Roofing Sheet Metal Co. v Facilities Dev. Corp., 70 A.D.2d 1021, appeal dismissed 48 N.Y.2d 654; cf. Saff v Saff, 61 A.D.2d 452). Plaintiff deliberately chose to seek a constructive trust upon her husband's businesses rather than equitable distribution of "marital" assets. Consequently, she is not entitled to the benefits of the more liberal rules concerning preliminary injunctions which apply in the equitable distribution context ( Leibowits v Leibowits, 93 A.D.2d 535). Weinstein, J.P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.