Chase Home Finance, LLC v. Cartelli

140 A.D.3d 911, 32 N.Y.S.3d 515
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 15, 2016
Docket2015-07313
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 140 A.D.3d 911 (Chase Home Finance, LLC v. Cartelli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chase Home Finance, LLC v. Cartelli, 140 A.D.3d 911, 32 N.Y.S.3d 515 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Stephen Seekircher appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, West-chester County (DiBella, J.), entered April 8, 2015, which denied his motion to preliminarily enjoin the plaintiff from taking any action to vacate or remove him from the subject premises.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs to the nonparty respondent.

To obtain a preliminary injunction, the moving party must *912 establish, by clear and convincing evidence, (1) a likelihood of success on the merits, (2) irreparable injury absent a preliminary injunction, and (3) that the equities balance in his or her favor (see Nobu Next Door, LLC v Fine Arts Hous., Inc., 4 NY3d 839, 840 [2005]; Zoller v HSBC Mtge. Corp. [USA], 135 AD3d 932, 933 [2016]; Matter of Armanida Realty Corp. v Town of Oyster Bay, 126 AD3d 894 [2015]; M.H. Mandelbaum Orthotic & Prosthetic Servs., Inc. v Werner, 126 AD3d 859, 860 [2015]). “The decision to grant or deny a preliminary injunction lies within the sound discretion of the Supreme Court” (Matter of Armanida Realty Corp. v Town of Oyster Bay, 126 AD3d at 894-895 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Doe v Axelrod, 73 NY2d 748, 750 [1988]). Here, the appellant failed to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying his motion to preliminarily enjoin the plaintiff from taking any action to vacate or remove him from the subject premises.

Rivera, J.R, Roman, Maltese and Duffy, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Shake Shack Fulton St. Brooklyn, LLC v. Allied Prop. Group, LLC
2019 NY Slip Op 8438 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Emanuel Mizrahi, DDS, P.C. v. Angela Andretta, DMD, P.C.
2019 NY Slip Op 2315 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Soundview Cinemas, Inc. v. AC I Soundview, LLC
2017 NY Slip Op 3209 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
159-MP Corp. v. Cab Bedford, LLC
53 Misc. 3d 803 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 A.D.3d 911, 32 N.Y.S.3d 515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chase-home-finance-llc-v-cartelli-nyappdiv-2016.