Zodkevitch v. Feibush, 49 A.D.3d 424 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). · Go Syfert
Zodkevitch v. Feibush, 49 A.D.3d 424 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
9 citation events (9 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Ben-Avraham v. Bomze (nysupctnewyork, 2026-03-18)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ben-Avraham v. Bomze
N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty. · 2026 · confidence medium
Defendants are correct that, generally, a preliminary injunction is unavailable where the alleged injury can be adequately compensated by an award of monetary damages (see Zodkevitch v Feibush, 49 AD3d 424, 425 [2008]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Clark v. City of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Therefore, that branch of the municipal defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them was properly granted (see Salone v Town of Hempstead, 91 AD3d at 747 ; Diliberti v City of New York, 49 AD3d 424, 424 [2008]; Moore-Mohammed v City of New York, 101 AD3d 519, 520 [2012]; Jennifer R. v City of Syracuse, 43 AD3d 1326, 1327 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Clark v. City of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Therefore, that branch of the municipal defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them was properly granted (see Salone v Town of Hempstead, 91 AD3d at 747 ; Diliberti v City of New York, 49 AD3d 424, 424 [2008]; Moore-Mohammed v City of New York, 101 AD3d 519, 520 [2012]; Jennifer R. v City of Syracuse, 43 AD3d 1326, 1327 [2007]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rony Zodkevitch, M.D.
v.
Igal Feibush, and Steven Spiegel, Esq., (And a Third-Party Action.)
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 20, 2008.
49 A.D.3d 424
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

[*425] Supreme Court erred in directing appellant to place into an escrow account the funds he allegedly misappropriated since plaintiffs failed to make a clear showing that they would suffer irreparable injury unless that relief were granted, a necessary element on a motion for a preliminary injunction (see CPLR 6301; Matter of Non-Emergency Transporters of N.Y. v Hammons, 249 AD2d 124, 127 [1998]). Specifically, plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that an award of monetary damages would not adequately compensate them (see US. Re Cos., Inc. v Scheerer, 41 AD3d 152, 155 [2007]; ERS Enters. v Empire Holdings, 286 AD2d 206, 207-208 [2001]; Non-Emergency Transporters of N.Y., supra; cf. Sirius Satellite Radio v Chinatown Apts., 303 AD2d 261, 261-262 [2003]). At bottom, plaintiffs seek security for a potential money judgment against appellant, relief that should be sought under CPLR 6201 (attachment). In light of our conclusion that plaintiffs failed to make a clear showing that they would suffer irreparable injury unless appellant were directed to place the funds in escrow, we need not and do not pass on whether plaintiffs established a likelihood of success on the merits and a balancing of the equities in their favor.

With respect to the directive to turn over files, we reject appellant’s arguments that the court’s prohibition against him holding himself out as the entities’ attorney created a retaining lien over the files that did not previously exist and thus could not have been asserted on the original motion. In any event, appellant has turned over copies of his complete legal file to plaintiffs, losing whatever leverage a retaining lien affords a[*426] discharged attorney. Concur-Andrias, J.E, Nardelli, Williams, McGuire and Acosta, JJ.