Melrose Credit Union v. Itskovich
Docket: 2019-12607
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; August 3, 2022; New York; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
In Melrose Credit Union v. Itskovich, decided on August 3, 2022, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York affirmed a lower court's order denying the defendants' motion for a preliminary injunction against the seizure of taxi medallions securing promissory notes. The case involved Ruvin Itskovich, who executed seven loan agreements on behalf of corporate defendants in 2014, with a total value of approximately $4 million. The notes were due by December 18, 2017, but were extended by three months without a refinancing agreement being reached. Melrose Credit Union alleged default in April 2018 and attempted to seize the medallions in June 2019. The defendants sought a preliminary injunction, claiming they had an agreement to modify the loans. However, the court found they did not demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits as they failed to provide evidence of a loan modification, either written or sufficient oral evidence. The court emphasized that the defendants’ failure to make payments was undisputed. The decision concluded that the defendants did not meet the necessary criteria for a preliminary injunction, including the likelihood of success and potential irreparable harm. The appeal was denied, and the defendants' additional arguments were dismissed as improperly raised for the first time on appeal.