Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
BLACKMAN v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY
May 13, 2004.
CARLOS BLACKMAN, MARK WINSLOW, ROBERT DAVENPORT, JOSEPH SEMIEN, LUIS SANTANA, and ROGER TOUSSAINT, as President of TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 100, Plaintiffs,
v.
NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Defendant.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: STERLING JOHNSON, JR., District Judge
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Carlos Blackman's
request that this Court issue an Order to Show Cause for a
Preliminary Injunction: (1) requiring the New York City Transit
Authority (NYCTA) to reinstate Plaintiff to employment; and (2)
restraining the NYCTA from interfering with Plaintiff's full
performance of his elected responsibilities as an officer of
Local 100.
A Plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary injunction upon
showing: (1) irreparable harm, and (2) either (a) a likelihood of
success on the merits, or (b) sufficiently serious questions going to the merits to make them a fair ground for
litigation and a balance of hardships tipping decidedly in favor
of the moving party. Jackson Dairy, Inc. v. H.P. Hood & Sons,
Inc., 596 F.2d 70, 72 (2d Cir. 1979); Savage v. Gorski,
850 F.2d 64, 67 (2d Cir. 1988). Plaintiff's allegations are
insufficient to demonstrate a risk of irreparable harm to himself
or others. See Piercy v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York,
No. 02 CIV 5005, 2003 WI, 115230, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 13, 2002);
American Postal Workers Union v. United States Postal Service,
766 F.2d 715, 722 (2d Cir. 1985). Therefore, Plaintiffs' request
is DENIED.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw ...