Opinion
2002-09608
Argued May 2, 2003.
June 2, 2003.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 7502(c) for injunctive relief in connection with an arbitrable controversy, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Jonas, J.), dated September 18, 2002, which denied their motion, inter alia, to enjoin the respondent from assigning, disposing of, transferring, or removing from its current accounts money, properties, and/or other assets to the extent of $1,000,000, and (2) granted the respondent's cross motion to vacate an ex parte temporary restraining order.
Robert M. Bursky, Huntington, N.Y., for appellants.
Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., Uniondale, N.Y. (Christine McInerney and Timothy DiResta of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A court may grant a preliminary injunction in connection with an arbitrable controversy "only upon the ground that the award to which the applicant may be entitled may be rendered ineffectual without such provisional relief" (CPLR 7502[c]; see Matter of Kal Data v. AMC Computer Corp., 268 A.D.2d 589). In addition, to obtain relief under that section, a petitioner must make a showing of the traditional equitable criteria for the granting of temporary relief under CPLR article 63 (see Itzkowitz v. G I Passover Bakery Corp., 303 A.D.2d 638 [2d Dept, Mar. 24, 2003]; Matter of Kal Data v. AMC Computer Corp., supra; Matter of Cullman Ventures, 252 A.D.2d 222, 230; SG Cowen Securities Corp. v. Messih, 224 F.3d 79, 82-84). In the instant case, the petitioners failed to establish their entitlement to injunctive relief pursuant to CPLR 6301.
In light of our determination, we need not reach the petitioners' remaining contention.
SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.