How cited: Coscarelli v. Esquared Hospitality LLC · Go Syfert

Coscarelli v. Esquared Hospitality LLC (2019)

green · 50 citation events across 5 courts. Showing the 36 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2019 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
201920222026
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 3 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 215 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 2 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (citation omitted).
citation omitted
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 2 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).1 To show irreparable harm, the movant must demonstrate an injury that is neither remote nor speculative, but actual and imminent and that cannot be remedied by an award of monetary damages.” Oliver v. N.Y.
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 2 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 2 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 215 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). “[T]he FAA creates a body of federal substantive law of arbitrability, applicable to any arbitration agreement within the coverage of the Act,” but “in evaluating whether the parties have entered into a valid arbitration agreement, the court must look to state law principles.” Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, U.S., L.L.C. v. Nackel, 346 F.3d 360, 364 (2d Cir. 2003).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 2 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 215 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 2 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 215 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · 2 citations in this opinion
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 215 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019), it will touch on them briefly for the sake of the record.
Quote Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (“Thus, if a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not [] address the remaining elements.”); Procter & Gamble Co. v. Ultreo, Inc., 574 F. Supp. 2d 339, 344 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (“A moving party must demonstrate that irreparable injury. . . is likely before any other requirement for the issuance of an injunction may be considered.”).
“Thus, if a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not [] address the remaining elements.”
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
Preliminary injunctions are “‘an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right.’” Coscarelli v. ESquared Hospitality LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (quoting Winter v. Nat.
quoting Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008)
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (quoting Tough Traveler, Ltd. v. Outbound Prods., 60 F.3d 964, 968 (2d Cir. 1995) (“[D]elay, ‘standing alone,’ may ‘preclude the granting of preliminary injunctive relief’ ” because it “suggests that there is, in fact, no irreparable injury.”).
quoting Tough Traveler, Ltd. v. Outbound Prods., 60 F.3d 964, 968 (2d Cir. 1995) (“[D]elay, ‘standing alone,’ may ‘preclude the granting of preliminary injunctive relief’ ” because it “suggests that there is, in fact, no irreparable injury.”
Rule Authority · Bankr. S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (courts “must consider a plaintiff’s delay in seeking relief when analyzing whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm”) (internal quotation marks omitted).
courts “must consider a plaintiff’s delay in seeking relief when analyzing whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm”
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (quoting Tough Traveler, Ltd. v. Outbound Prods., 60 F.3d 964, 968 (2d Cir. 1995) (“[D]elay, ‘standing alone,’ may ‘preclude the granting of preliminary injunctive relief” because it “suggests that there is, in fact, no irreparable injury.’).
quoting Tough Traveler, Ltd. v. Outbound Prods., 60 F.3d 964, 968 (2d Cir. 1995) (“[D]elay, ‘standing alone,’ may ‘preclude the granting of preliminary injunctive relief” because it “suggests that there is, in fact, no irreparable injury.’
Quote Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (“[I]f a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not even address the remaining elements [of the preliminary-injunction analysis].”).
“[I]f a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not even address the remaining elements [of the preliminary-injunction analysis].”
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (citation omitted).
citation omitted
green Kim v. CIMG Inc. (2025)
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (citation omitted).
citation omitted
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (citing Gidatex, S.r.L. v. Campaniello Imps., Ltd., 13 F. Supp. 2d 417, 419 (S.D.N.Y. 1998).
citing Gidatex, S.r.L. v. Campaniello Imps., Ltd., 13 F. Supp. 2d 417, 419 (S.D.N.Y. 1998). Here, the circumstances that Plaintiff complains of have persisted for years (or, in the case of the purportedly absent strobe lights, were addressed many years ago, see supra
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y. · signal: cf.
See, e.g., Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000) (holding that a district court may dismiss without granting leave to amend where repleading would be “futile”); cf., e.g., Coscarelli v. ESquared Hospitality LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (dismissing claims under California law and granting leave to replead under New York law). contempt, hatred, ridicule, aversion or disgrace.” Davis v. Boeheim, 24 N.Y.3d 262, 268 (2014); Cousins v. Goodier, 283 A…
dismissing claims under California law and granting leave to replead under New York law
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (internal quotation marks omitted).
internal quotation marks omitted
Rule Authority · N.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (noting that courts in this Circuit typically decline to grant preliminary injunctions in the face of unexplained delays of more than two months). terminated, she will have an adequate remedy at law in the form of money damages and possibly reinstatement.® As it has been determined that Pak has failed to establish that she will be irreparably harmed in the absence of preliminary injunctive relief, the remaining requirements for t…
noting that courts in this Circuit typically decline to grant preliminary injunctions in the face of unexplained delays of more than two months
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 226 (S.D.N.Y. 2019), ECF No. 72.
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · N.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) ("[I]f a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not even address the remaining elements" of the preliminary injunction standard).
"[I]f a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not even address the remaining elements" of the preliminary injunction standard
Rule Authority · E.D.N.Y
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (“[I]f a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not even address the remaining elements” of the preliminary injunction standard).
“[I]f a party fails to show irreparable harm, a court need not even address the remaining elements” of the preliminary injunction standard
Rule Authority · M.D. Ala.
Coscarelli v. ESquared Hospitality LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 215 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · E.D.N.Y
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 221 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Rule Authority · S.D.N.Y.
LLC, 364 F. Supp. 3d 207, 222 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (noting, in the preliminary injunction context, that “it is well established that a court must consider a plaintiff’s delay in seeking relief when analyzing whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Cassano, 189 F.R.D. at 86 (finding that there was “no excuse” for “waiting 12 days” to figure out what privileged document had been shared by mistake); cf. USI I…
noting, in the preliminary injunction context, that “it is well established that a court must consider a plaintiff’s delay in seeking relief when analyzing whether the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief.” (internal quotation marks omitted)