Weaver v. Essex Owners Corp.

4 Citing cases

  1. Joon Song v. MHM Sponsors Co.

    176 A.D.3d 572 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)   Cited 12 times

    The motion court properly granted defendants' respective motions to dismiss the complaint and denied plaintiff's motion to amend as futile ( Okoli v. Paul Hastings LLP, 117 A.D.3d 539, 540, 985 N.Y.S.2d 556 [1st Dept. 2014] ). Plaintiff's failure to allege specific irreparable harm was fatal to his request for an injunction ( Weaver v. Essex Owners Corp., 235 A.D.2d 369, 370, 652 N.Y.S.2d 974 [1st Dept. 1997], lv dismissed in part, denied in part 89 N.Y.2d 1073, 659 N.Y.S.2d 851, 681 N.E.2d 1298 [1997] ). As for his substantive claims, plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for tortious interference with business relations because he did not substantiate how he was injured as a result of defendants' alleged interference ( Aramid Entertainment Fund Ltd. v. Wimbledon Fin. Master Fund, Ltd., 105 A.D.3d 682, 965 N.Y.S.2d 26 [1st Dept. 2013], lv denied 22 N.Y.3d 858, 981 N.Y.S.2d 368, 4 N.E.3d 380 [2013] ).

  2. 319 Smile Corp. v. Forman Fifth, LLC

    37 A.D.3d 245 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)   Cited 7 times

    Before: Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Marlow, Buckley and Sweeny, JJ. The court properly found that plaintiff did not timely seek injunctive relief, since the order to show cause that brought about a temporary restraining order and tolled the cure period pending the hearing on the Yellowstone application was not obtained until after the cure period had ended and the notice of termination served ( see Weaver v Essex Owners Corp., 235 AD2d 369, lv denied 89 NY2d 1073). Plaintiffs contention that its action was timely pursuant to CPLR 205 (a) because it related back to an earlier action that had been timely commenced and dismissed is not properly before this Court, since this point was not raised before the Supreme Court ( see Deutsch v LoPresti, 272 AD2d 506, 507). We find an insufficient basis for an award of sanctions against plaintiff's counsel.

  3. JH Parking Corp. v. East 112th Realty Corp.

    298 A.D.2d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)   Cited 4 times

    The record discloses that plaintiff did not timely seek injunctive relief since the order to show cause that effected a temporary restraining order and tolled the cure period, pending the hearing on theYellowstone application, was signed by the motion court after the cure period had ended and after service of the notice of termination (see Daashur Assocs. v. December Artists Apt. Corp., 226 A.D.2d 114, 114-115). The motion therefore could have been denied as untimely (see Weaver v. Essex Owners Corp., 235 A.D.2d 369, 370, lv denied in part and dismissed in part 89 N.Y.2d 1073). In any event, the record supports the motion court's conclusion that plaintiff would not or could not cure the alleged default by means short of vacating the premises, and therefore could not establish its entitlement to Yellowstone relief (see Graubard Mollen Horowitz Pomeranz Shapiro v. 600 Third Ave. Assocs., 93 N.Y.2d 508, 514).

  4. Westside Radiology Assocs., P.C. v. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hosp. Ctr.

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 30970 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016)

    It is well settled that there is no basis for relief provided by a Yellowstone injunction, where the injunction is sought after expiration of the period to cure and service of the notice of termination (Daashur Assoc. v. December Artists Apt. Corp., 226 A.D.2d 114, 114-115 [1st Dept., 1996]; KB Gallery, LLC v. 875 W. 181 Owners Corp., 76 A.D.3d 909 [1st Dept., 2010]; JH Parking Corp. v. East 112 Realty Corp., 298 A.D.2d 258 [1st Dept., 2002]; B. Boman & Co. v. Professional Data Mgt., 218 A.D.2d 637 [1st Dept., 1995]; 319 Smile Corp. v. Forman Fifth, LLC, 37 A.D.3d 245 [1st Dept., 2007]; Prince Fashions, Inc. v. 542 Holding Corp., 15 A.D.3d 214, 215 [1st Dept., 2005]; and Weaver v. Essex Owners Corp., 235 A.D.2d 369, 370 [1st Dept., 1997]).