Opinion
February 25, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.).
Plaintiff's motions for equitable relief were properly denied since it has, an adequate remedy at law ( see, 410 Sixth Ave. Foods v. 410 Sixth Ave., 197 A.D.2d 435, 437), and since it has not shown a likelihood of success upon the merits ( see, Considar, Inc. v. Redi Corp. Establishment, 238 A.D.2d 111). Plaintiff has not demonstrated actual, intentional fraud in the underlying commercial transaction independent of any claim regarding non-conforming goods ( see, 410 Sixth Ave. Foods v. 410 Sixth Ave., 197 A.D.2d, supra, at 436), and an award of the equitable relief sought upon a lesser showing would subvert the salutary business purposes of a letter of credit ( see, Matter of Supreme Mdse. Co. v. Chemical Bank, 70 N.Y.2d 344, 352-353).
Concur — Rosenberger, J., P., Ellerin, Williams and Andrias, JJ.