Opinion
15251 Index No. 150365/21 Case No. 2021–00414
03-29-2022
MEDALLION FINANCIAL CORP. et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. Savas TSITIRIDIS et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Fox Rothschild LLP, New York (Brett A. Berman of counsel), for Savas Tsitiridis, appellant. Eisenberg & Carton, Uniondale (Lloyd M. Eisenberg of counsel), for 183 Daniels Lane LLC, 27 Street Realty, LLC, Crosstown Realty Holdings LLC, LIC Realty Holdings, LLC, 1057 Jackson Ave LLC, 38–15 Queens LLC, 43–05 Vernon Boulevard, LLC, 4512 N. Elston LLC, 4536 N. Elston LLC and Azurite LLC, appellants. Vedder Price P.C., New York (Mitchell D. Cohen of counsel), for respondents.
Fox Rothschild LLP, New York (Brett A. Berman of counsel), for Savas Tsitiridis, appellant.
Eisenberg & Carton, Uniondale (Lloyd M. Eisenberg of counsel), for 183 Daniels Lane LLC, 27 th Street Realty, LLC, Crosstown Realty Holdings LLC, LIC Realty Holdings, LLC, 1057 Jackson Ave LLC, 38–15 Queens LLC, 43–05 Vernon Boulevard, LLC, 4512 N. Elston LLC, 4536 N. Elston LLC and Azurite LLC, appellants.
Vedder Price P.C., New York (Mitchell D. Cohen of counsel), for respondents.
Renwick, J.P., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Singh, Pitt, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lynn R. Kotler, J.), entered February 1, 2021, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.
In this action to set aside alleged fraudulent conveyances and other relief in aid of enforcement of money judgments, plaintiffs can be fully compensated by a monetary award, and thus an injunction will not issue because no irreparable harm will be sustained in the absence of such relief (see Credit Agricole Indosuez v. Rossiyskiy Kredit Bank, 94 N.Y.2d 541, 548, 708 N.Y.S.2d 26, 729 N.E.2d 683 [2000] [holding that where a money judgment is "the true object of the action," an injunction should be denied] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see also Matter of Non–Emergency Transporters of N.Y., Inc. v. Hammons, 249 A.D.2d 124, 127, 672 N.Y.S.2d 16 [1st Dept. 1998] ; SportsChannel Am. Assoc. v. National Hockey League, 186 A.D.2d 417, 418, 589 N.Y.S.2d 2 [1st Dept. 1992] ).
Plaintiffs argue that ( Credit Agricole, 94 N.Y.2d at 541, 708 N.Y.S.2d 26, 729 N.E.2d 683 ) is distinguishable because, rather than seeking to preliminarily enjoin a defendant's assets pending a potential judgment against him, they seek to enforce judgments already secured against defendant Savas Tsitiridis. However, in JSC VTB Bank v. Mavlyanov, 154 A.D.3d 560, 561, 63 N.Y.S.3d 40 (1st Dept. 2017), we applied the Credit Agricole rule to a plaintiff who, like the instant plaintiffs, had already obtained money judgments and sought a preliminary injunction, among other measures, in aid of efforts to collect on such judgments, and held that because the judgments were monetary in nature, irreparable harm could not be shown, and a preliminary injunction should not have been granted. That plaintiffs have styled their claims as claims to "set aside" Tsitiridis's allegedly fraudulent conveyances or "levy execution" on the fraudulently conveyed assets does not alter the monetary nature of their alleged harm (see e.g. JSC VTB Bank, 154 A.D.3d at 561, 63 N.Y.S.3d 40 ).