Opinion
August 31, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (I. Aronin, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, with costs, and the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is granted unconditionally, with the appellants' limitation of liability pursuant to CPLR 2512 set at $10.
In light of the denial by the Board of Standards and Appeals of a variance to the defendants and the strong prima facie showing made by the plaintiffs that the defendants' use and operation of the subject premises as a contractor's establishment was in violation of New York City's Zoning Resolution, Building Code and Nuisance Abatement Law, the plaintiffs are entitled to the requested preliminary injunction (see, City of New York v Bilynn Realty Corp., 118 A.D.2d 511, 512-513; City of Utica v Ortner, 256 App. Div. 1039; City of New York v. Narod Realty Corp., 122 Misc.2d 885, 888).
Further, in light of the respondents' representation that their application for a variance before the New York City Board of Standards and Appeals was denied, and, therefore, "there is no litigable issue left and nothing to argue about", we limit the appellants' liability for damages to the nominal sum of $10 (see, CPLR 2512). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Bracken and Brown, JJ., concur.