Although plaintiff alleges that enforcement of the Executive Order would also violate a federal statute, "the mere assertion that a plaintiff's federal statutory rights have been violated does not create a presumption of irreparable harm." King v. Pine Plains Cent. Sch. Dist., 923 F. Supp. 541, 546 (S.D.N.Y. 1996). "Otherwise, the courts would presume irreparable harm in deciding every preliminary injunction motion made in cases brought under federal statutes.
Here, Plaintiffs provide the Court with nothing but conclusory assertions regarding Mr. Hidalgo's financial state.Further, the Family Court will not enter a support order that will bankrupt or otherwise harm Mr. Hidalgo and his family, especially if his financial condition is as dire as his lawyer contends. King v. Pine Plains Cent. Sch. Dist., 923 F. Supp. 541, 546 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) ("[W]e note that N.Y. FAM. CT . ACT § 415 directs the Family Court to set a support payment amount that is 'fair and reasonable.' We feel confident in stating that such a standard does not encompass the entry of a support order that would drive the plaintiffs into bankruptcy or otherwise cause them irreparable financial harm.").
order); Bisnews AFE (Thail.) Ltd. v. Aspen Research Group Ltd., 437 Fed.Appx. 57, 58 (2d Cir.2011) (summ.order); Borey v. Nat'l Union Fire Insur. Co., 934 F.2d 30, 34 (2d Cir.1991); King v. Pine Plains Cent. Sch. Dist., 923 F.Supp. 541, 547 (S.D.N.Y.1996). In light of this authority, and the absence of any contrary holding in this Circuit, the Court declines to relieve LSSi of the burden of showing irreparable harm.
It argues that we must deny S Plaza's request for a preliminary injunction because S Plaza cannot establish irreparable harm since monetary damages are available to compensate it for its loss, and because it has offered to put the Additional Rent into escrow. See, e.g., Shapiro v. Cadman Towers, Inc., 51 F.3d 328, 332 (2d Cir.1995) (where monetary relief is adequate, party not entitled to preliminary injunction because there is no irreparable harm); accord Borey v. Nat'l Union Fire Insur. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 934 F.2d 30, 34 (2d Cir.1991); King v. Pine Plains Central School District, 923 F.Supp. 541, 546 (S.D.N.Y.1996). In its complaint, Caldor seeks only to recover the alleged pre-petition overpayments of Additional Rent.