Opinion
October 9, 1997
Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.).
Plaintiff's submission of an affidavit from a manager of the building showing that defendants conducted substantial business both from the apartment in question and in the common areas, coupled with defendants' letterhead indicating that the condominium is their principal place of business, is sufficient to establish plaintiff's likelihood of success on the merits at this juncture for purposes of granting a preliminary injunction (CPLR 6312 [a]). Plaintiff also demonstrated that it would suffer irreparable injury, in the form of lower quality of life for its residents and decreased property value, if defendants continued their business during the course of the litigation, and that the equities were in its favor ( see, Grant Co. v. Srogi, 52 N.Y.2d 496, 517; CPLR 6301). Moreover, if defendants are not in violation of the lease and other relevant documents, the preliminary injunction should not burden them. Plaintiff's initial failure to file an undertaking was subsequently cured ( see, Olechna v. Town of Smithtown, 51 A.D.2d 1036). We note that the appropriate remedy is a speedy trial, before which plaintiff should comply with all discovery requests of defendant.
We have considered defendants' other arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Nardelli, JJ.