MARDERS THE LANDSCAPE STORE, INC. v. Barylski
| Decision Date | 10 March 2003 |
| Citation | 756 N.Y.S.2d 429,303 A.D.2d 465 |
| Parties | MARDERS THE LANDSCAPE STORE, INC., Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>PETER BARYLSKI, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
It is well settled that to be entitled to a preliminary injunction, a movant must demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction, and a balancing of the equities in its favor (see Aetna Ins. Co. v Capasso, 75 NY2d 860 [1990]; Grant Co. v Srogi, 52 NY2d 496 [1981]; CPLR 6301, 6312 [a]). The plaintiff failed to meet its burden (see Neos v Lacey, 291 AD2d 434 [2002]; Skaggs-Walsh, Inc. v Chmiel, 224 AD2d 680 [1996]; MacIntyre v Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 221 AD2d 602 [1995]). The plaintiff's contention that a hearing was required upon its motion for a preliminary injunction is without merit (see CPLR 6312 [c]).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mut. Aid Ass'n of the Paid Fire Dep't of Yonkers, N.Y., Inc. v. City of Yonkers
...635 [2d Dept 2009] ; Automated Waste Disposal, Inc. v. Mid–Hudson Waste, Inc., 50 AD3d 1072 [2d Dept 2008] ; Marders the Landscape Store v. Barylski, 303 A.D.2d 465 [2d Dept 2003]. The application for a preliminary injunction is denied without a hearing.The court has considered the addition......
- Laramie Springtree Corp. v. EQUITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TRUST