190 A.D.2d 660 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1993
— In an action for damages incurred as a result of a temporary restraining order, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.), entered November 29, 1990, which, inter alia, denied its motion for summary judgment on the issue of the defendant’s liability for damages incurred by the temporary restraining order.
Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by adding a provision that, upon searching the record, summary judgment is granted in favor of the defendant on the merits dismissing the action; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the defendant.
The plaintiff seeks damages allegedly incurred by an improperly issued temporary restraining order which did not require that an undertaking be posted. We reject the plaintiff’s argument that the case law incorrectly interprets CPLR 6315. We agree with the Supreme Court that absent an undertaking, a damaged party is without a remedy absent a
We have considered the plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.