Summary
holding that in action to enjoin defendant's illegal use of property, "it was not necessary for the [Town] to demonstrate that the defendant's allegedly illegal use of his property was causing irreparable injury"
Summary of this case from New York v. Shinnecock Indian NationOpinion
December 26, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mallon, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from the order entered April 28, 1988, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order entered September 29, 1988, made upon reargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the order entered September 29, 1988, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.
The plaintiff town demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits as to the underlying action for a permanent injunction and it was not necessary for the plaintiff to demonstrate that the defendant's allegedly illegal use of his property was causing irreparable injury (see, Village of Pelham Manor v Crea, 112 A.D.2d 415, 416; Town of Islip v Clark, 90 A.D.2d 500). Further, in balancing the equities, the protection of the public is of paramount consideration. Thus, the issuance of a preliminary injunction was proper. Bracken, J.P., Brown, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.