IP International Products, Inc. v. 275 Canal Street Associates

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered August 5, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiff’s application for a Yellowstone injunction, unanimously affirmed, with costs. The court providently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff’s application for a Yellowstone injunction, because plaintiff failed to demonstrate a willingness to cure (see Cemco Rests. v Ten Park Ave. Tenants Corp., 135 AD2d 461, 463 [1st Dept 1987]; Linmont Realty v Vitocarl, Inc., 147 AD2d 618, 620 [2d Dept 1989]). Plaintiff’s assertions to the contrary are belied by its continued violation of the alterations provision of the lease, even as it purports to “cure” defects. We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Saxe, Gische and Kahn, JJ.