Falls Street Leasing Corp. v. City of Niagara Falls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Falls Street Leasing Corp. v. City of Niagara Falls

295 A.D.2d 1005, 743 N.Y.S.2d 368, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6272

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 14, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 295 A.D.2d 1005 (Falls Street Leasing Corp. v. City of Niagara Falls) 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

Falls Street Leasing Corp. v. City of Niagara Falls, 295 A.D.2d 1005, 743 N.Y.S.2d 368, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6272 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Niagara County (Boniello, III, J.), entered June 29, 2001, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is denied and the preliminary injunction is vacated.

Memorandum: Supreme Court abused its discretion in granting plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. In order to [1006]*1006establish entitlement to a preliminary injunction, plaintiffs had to establish, inter alia, “the prospect of irreparable injury if the provisional relief is withheld” (Doe v Axelrod, 73 NY2d 748, 750). Here, the conclusory allegations of plaintiffs with respect to irreparable injury “are insufficient to support [their] motion for a preliminary injunction” (Kaufman v International Bus. Machs. Corp., 97 AD2d 925, 926, affd 61 NY2d 930; see Neos v Lacey, 291 AD2d 434; Sutton, DeLeeuw, Clark & Darcy v Beck, 155 AD2d 962, 963; Matter of Baran v Otterbein, 84 AD2d 928, 929). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Scudder, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Niagara County (Boniello, III, J.), entered June 29, 2001, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is denied and the preliminary injunction is vacated.

Memorandum: Supreme Court abused its discretion in granting plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. In order to [1006]*1006establish entitlement to a preliminary injunction, plaintiffs had to establish, inter alia, “the prospect of irreparable injury if the provisional relief is withheld” (Doe v Axelrod, 73 NY2d 748, 750). Here, the conclusory allegations of plaintiffs with respect to irreparable injury “are insufficient to support [their] motion for a preliminary injunction” (Kaufman v International Bus. Machs. Corp., 97 AD2d 925, 926, affd 61 NY2d 930; see Neos v Lacey, 291 AD2d 434; Sutton, DeLeeuw, Clark & Darcy v Beck, 155 AD2d 962, 963; Matter of Baran v Otterbein, 84 AD2d 928, 929). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Scudder, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 1005, 743 N.Y.S.2d 368, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/falls-street-leasing-corp-v-city-of-niagara-falls-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack