From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rupert v. Rupert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 5, 1993
190 A.D.2d 1028 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

February 5, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Curran, J.

Present — Boomer, J.P., Pine, Lawton and Fallon, JJ.


Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: A preliminary injunction should not be granted where the right to ultimate relief in the action is in doubt (12 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 78:7). Nor should it be granted unless there is a showing that some act is being done or is threatened and imminent that will be destructive of such right (12 Carmody-Wait 2d, N Y Prac § 78:18). Thus, absent a showing that the antenuptial agreement was invalid and that defendant was about to dissipate his assets, the court should not have enjoined defendant from disposing of his separate property. The order appealed from is modified, therefore, by deleting the provision restraining defendant from disposing of his separate property.


Summaries of

Rupert v. Rupert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 5, 1993
190 A.D.2d 1028 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Rupert v. Rupert

Case Details

Full title:DOLORES RUPERT, Respondent, v. PHILIP D. RUPERT, JR., Appellant. (Appeal…

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

Date published: Feb 5, 1993

Citations

190 A.D.2d 1028 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
593 N.Y.S.2d 651

Citing Cases

Scott v. City of Buffalo

"A preliminary injunction should not be granted where the right to ultimate relief in the action is in…