Source: http://kirschenbaumesq.com/article/patti-v-cohen-227-ad2d-602-643-nys2d-389-mem-nyad-2-dept-may-28-1996-no-95-07363
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 10:14:24+00:00

Document:
Paul COHEN, et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Dollinger of counsel), for respondents.
plaintiffs' use of a certain driveway.
Co., Inc. v. B & S Indus., 135 A.D.2d 599, 522 N.Y.S.2d 177; 487 Elmwood v.
A.D.2d 972, 429 N.Y.S.2d 59).
BALLETTA, J.P., and MILLER, SULLIVAN and COPERTINO, JJ., concur.
Stephen PATTI, et al., Respondents,v.Paul COHEN, et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum, P.C., Garden City (Samuel Kirschenbaum, of counsel), for appellants.
Dollinger, Gonski, Grossman, Permut & Hirschhorn, Carle Place (Matthew Dollinger of counsel), for respondents.
*602 In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for trespass, the defendants Paul Cohen, Jane Cohen, and Debbie Leiman appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated May 19, 1995, which granted the plaintiffs' motion to preliminarily enjoin them from interfering with the plaintiffs' use of a certain driveway.
The Supreme Court correctly granted the plaintiffs' motion to preliminarily enjoin the defendants from interfering with their use of a driveway located on and between the plaintiffs' property and the appellants' property. The plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm absent the preliminary injunction, and a balancing of the equities in their favor (see, Aetna Ins. Co. v. Capasso, 75 N.Y.2d 860, 552 N.Y.S.2d 918, 552 N.E.2d 166; Melvin v. Union Coll., 195 A.D.2d 447, 600 N.Y.S.2d 141; Astoria Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. June, 190 A.D.2d 644, 593 N.Y.S.2d 250; *603Burmax Co., Inc. v. B & S Indus., 135 A.D.2d 599, 522 N.Y.S.2d 177; 487 Elmwood v. Hassett, 107 A.D.2d 285, 486 N.Y.S.2d 113; Matter of XAR Corp. v. Di Donato, 76 A.D.2d 972, 429 N.Y.S.2d 59).

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.