Olabi v. Mayfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Olabi v. Mayfield

8 A.D.3d 459, 778 N.Y.S.2d 311, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8497

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

DecidedJune 14, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 A.D.3d 459 (Olabi v. Mayfield) 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

Olabi v. Mayfield, 8 A.D.3d 459, 778 N.Y.S.2d 311, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8497 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Grays, J.), dated October 3, 2003, which denied their motion to preliminarily enjoin the defendants from selling or encumbering certain real property, to vacate a conveyance of the real property, and to stay enforcement of a warrant of eviction.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To demonstrate entitlement to a preliminary injunction, the movant must demonstrate a probability of success on the merits, danger of irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction, and a balance of the equities in favor of granting the injunction (see CPLR 6301; Aetna Ins. Co. v Capasso, 75 NY2d 860, 862 [1990]; [460]*460Doe v Axelrod, 73 NY2d 748, 750 [1988]; 1659 Ralph Ave. Laundromat Corp. v Ben David Enters., 307 AD2d 288, 289 [2003]). The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a probability of success on the merits. Florio, J.P., Schmidt, Adams and Fisher, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Grays, J.), dated October 3, 2003, which denied their motion to preliminarily enjoin the defendants from selling or encumbering certain real property, to vacate a conveyance of the real property, and to stay enforcement of a warrant of eviction.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To demonstrate entitlement to a preliminary injunction, the movant must demonstrate a probability of success on the merits, danger of irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction, and a balance of the equities in favor of granting the injunction (see CPLR 6301; Aetna Ins. Co. v Capasso, 75 NY2d 860, 862 [1990]; [460]*460Doe v Axelrod, 73 NY2d 748, 750 [1988]; 1659 Ralph Ave. Laundromat Corp. v Ben David Enters., 307 AD2d 288, 289 [2003]). The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a probability of success on the merits. Florio, J.P., Schmidt, Adams and Fisher, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 459, 778 N.Y.S.2d 311, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olabi-v-mayfield-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack