From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Roberts v. Paterson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 26, 2011
84 A.D.3d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 5317N.

May 26, 2011.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered January 19, 2011, denying plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction requiring defendants to fund health insurance benefits for retirees of the New York City Off-Track Betting Corporation (NYC OTB) pending determination of plaintiffs' plenary action for the same relief, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Stroock Stroock Lavan LLP, New York (Ernst H. Rosenberger of counsel), for appellants.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York (Laura R. Johnson of counsel), for David A. Paterson, respondent.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Sharyn Rootenberg of counsel), for municipal respondents.

Before: Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Friedman, Catterson and Richter, JJ.


The City and the State are precluded by NY Constitution, article X, § 5, and Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law § 614 from assuming the legal obligation to pay the NYC OTB retirees' health insurance benefits. Thus, plaintiffs cannot show a probability of success on the merits or otherwise meet the "heightened standard" governing their application for a mandatory preliminary injunction ( see Second on Second Cafe, Inc. v Hing Sing Trading, Inc., 66 AD3d 255, 264, 273).

[Prior Case History: 2011 NY Slip Op 30096(U).]


Summaries of

Roberts v. Paterson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 26, 2011
84 A.D.3d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Roberts v. Paterson

Case Details

Full title:LILLIAN ROBERTS, as Executive Director of District Council 37, American…

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

Date published: May 26, 2011

Citations

84 A.D.3d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 4380
923 N.Y.S.2d 326

Citing Cases

Woodstock 50, LLC v. Dentsu Inc.

A party, like W50, seeking a mandate of specific conduct, must meet a "heightened standard." Roberts v.…

Roberts v. Paterson

“The City and the State are precluded by N.Y. Constitution, article X, § 5, and Racing, Pari–Mutuel Wagering…