Kew Forest Neighborhood Ass'n v. Lieberman

284 A.D.2d 377, 725 N.Y.S.2d 897, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6104
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Kew Forest Neighborhood Ass'n v. Lieberman. Read the opinion of the Court — 306 A.D.2d 443

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to permanently enjoin the construction of an apartment building as being in violation of a restrictive covenant, the defendants appeal from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schmidt, J.), dated September 19, 2000, which, inter alia, [378]*378denied their cross motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of standing and granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contention, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs’ application for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs established a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm absent the granting of the injunction, and that the balance of the equities is in their favor (see, Aetna Ins. Co. v Capasso, 75 NY2d 860; Grant Co. v Srogi, 52 NY2d 496).

The defendants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J. P., Goldstein, Luciano and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

Kew Forest Neighborhood Ass'n v. Lieberman, 284 A.D.2d 377, 725 N.Y.S.2d 897, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6104 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

284 A.D.2d 377 (Kew Forest Neighborhood Ass'n v. Lieberman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

W. T. Grant Co. v. Srogi
420 N.E.2d 953 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
Aetna Insurance v. Capasso
552 N.E.2d 166 (New York Court of Appeals, 1990)