Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
LAIG, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. MEDANITO S.A., Defendant–Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered November 10, 2014, which denied plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
In November 2013, plaintiff and defendant began negotiating the potential joint purchase of shares of an Argentine company (CHASA). The parties entered into a Confidentiality Agreement, which included a provision that defendant would refrain from acquiring CHASA shares without plaintiff for a period of one year, unless plaintiff decided not to continue with the acquistion. Subsequently, the parties jointly submitted a binding offer to the shareholders of CHASA to purchase the CHASA shares. While the binding offer contained a merger clause, this clause did not cause the binding offer to supersede the Confidentiality Agreement, as the binding offer does not govern the relationship or terms between the parties.
Nevertheless, plaintiff failed to sustain its “particularly high” burden of proof with respect to the likelihood of its success on the merits (Council of City of N.Y. v. Giuliani, 248 A.D.2d 1, 4 [1st Dept 1998], lv dismissed and denied 92 N.Y.2d 938 [1998]; see Nobu Next Door, LLC v. Fine Arts Hous., Inc., 4 NY3d 839, 840 [2005] ). Given the numerous documents and text messages showing that plaintiff did not have the financial ability to purchase the CHASA shares, plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to refute defendant's assertion that plaintiff decided not to continue with the transaction.
Plaintiff also failed to show the prospect of irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted, and the balance of equities in its favor (Giuliani, 248 A.D.2d at 4).
Given the foregoing determination, we need not consider plaintiff's remaining contention regarding an undertaking.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: July 07, 2015
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)