Ziankoski v. Simmons
140 A.D.2d 1007, 529 N.Y.S.2d 718, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6206
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 27, 1988·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
Memorandum: The motion for a preliminary injunction should not have been granted because the plaintiffs failed to show that, in the absence of an injunction, they would suffer irreparable injury (see, CPLR 6301). Moreover, Special Term had no power to dispense with the undertaking required by CPLR 6312 (b) (City Store Gates Mfg. Corp. v United Steel Prods., 79 AD2d 671, 672). Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ziankoski v. Simmons, 140 A.D.2d 1007, 529 N.Y.S.2d 718, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6206 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).
140 A.D.2d 1007 (Ziankoski v. Simmons) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Vassenelli v. City of Syracuse
2018 NY Slip Op 2957 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Malach v. Key International Manufacturing, Inc.
157 A.D.2d 707 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Sutton, DeLeeuw, Clark & Darcy v. Beck
155 A.D.2d 962 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)