Brodsky v. City of Rochester
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
To be entitled to a preliminary injunction, the movant must demonstrate: (1) a likelihood of ultimate success on the merits; (2) irreparable injury absent the granting of the preliminary injunction; and (3) that the equities weigh in his favor (Niagara Recycling v Town of Niagara, 83 AD2d 316, 324; Tucker v Toia, 54 AD2d 322, 324). Plaintiff bears the burden of establishing his undisputed entitlement to a preliminary injunction through the tender of evidentiary proof (Armbruster v Gipp, 103 AD2d 1014; Camardo v Board of Educ., 50 AD2d 1073). Plaintiff has failed to satisfy that burden.
Although…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Tucker v. ToiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Niagara Recycling, Inc. v. Town of NiagaraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- Armbruster v. GippAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Camardo v. Board of Education of the City School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975