Metropolitan Steel Industries, Inc. v. Perini Corporation

• Decision Date: 03 April 2008
• Docket Number: 3268N.
• Citation: Metropolitan Steel Industries, Inc. v. Perini Corporation, 50 A.D.3d 321, 855 N.Y.S.2d 441, 2008 NY Slip Op 3071 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
• Parties: METROPOLITAN STEEL INDUSTRIES, INC., Doing Business as STEELCO, Respondent, v. PERINI CORPORATION et al., Appellants. (And a Third-Party Action.)
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

50 A.D.3d 321

855 N.Y.S.2d 441

2008 NY Slip Op 03071

METROPOLITAN STEEL INDUSTRIES, INC., Doing Business as STEELCO, Respondent, v. PERINI CORPORATION et al., Appellants. (And a Third-Party Action.)

3268N.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

Decided April 3, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered August 17, 2007, which denied defendants-appellants' motion to vacate the information subpoena and restraining notices served by plaintiff, and for a preliminary injunction enjoining plaintiff from issuing any further restraining notices, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff granted leave to

settle a new judgment awarding it the base contract amount of $576,441 plus interest, costs and disbursements, and severing the claim for unpaid extra work. [See 2007 NY Slip Op 32545(U).]

The court properly denied appellants' motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining respondent from serving further restraining notices since appellants failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable injury absent the grant of injunctive relief, and that the balance of the equities tips in their favor (OraSure Tech., Inc. v Prestige Brands Holdings, Inc., 42 AD3d 348 [2007]). Indeed, on a prior appeal, we affirmed respondent's "entitlement to the contract balance, with prejudgment interest thereon from November 6, 2001" (36 AD3d 568, 569 [2007]). Therefore, appellants could not establish a likelihood of success on the merits...