From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Merola v. Telonis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 27, 1987
127 A.D.2d 1007 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

February 27, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Tait, J.

Present — Denman, J.P., Boomer, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied. Memorandum: In this action for an injunction, plaintiff seeks to restrain defendants, James D. Telonis, M.D. and Dennis J. Nave, M.D., from allegedly violating "Covenants Not to Compete with Employer" and "Not to Solicit from Employer," both contained in employment contracts between the parties. Defendants appeal from an order granting plaintiff a preliminary injunction.

"'Unless the plaintiff clearly demonstrates a necessity and urgency for relief in advance of a trial including the sustaining in the meantime of irreparable injury, the injunctive remedy will be withheld pending the trial' (Allied-Crossroads Nuclear Corp. v. Atcor, Inc., 25 A.D.2d 643, 644; CPLR 6301)" (Village of Honeoye Falls v. Elmer, 69 A.D.2d 1010).

The conclusory allegations of plaintiff in support of its application do not establish that irreparable harm will result in the absence of injunctive relief. Thus, Special Term abused its discretion in granting the injunction.


Summaries of

Merola v. Telonis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 27, 1987
127 A.D.2d 1007 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Merola v. Telonis

Case Details

Full title:A. JOHN MEROLA, M.D., P.C., Respondent, v. JAMES D. TELONIS et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Feb 27, 1987

Citations

127 A.D.2d 1007 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Twin City Physicians Group v. Kaushal

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court abused its…

John G. Ullman & Associates, Inc. v. BCK Partners, Inc.

With respect to plaintiff's likelihood of success on the merits, we conclude that plaintiff failed to…