The plaintiffs sought to extend an interim injunction and a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) against the defendants, alleging they were defrauded of $880,000 through an investment scheme involving real estate.
The court found a strong prima facie case of fraudulent misappropriation based on bank records showing funds diverted for personal use and no real estate purchases.
The court inferred a serious risk of asset dissipation and found irreparable harm would result without the injunction.
The balance of convenience favored granting the injunction and CPL.
The defendants' arguments regarding lack of fraud evidence, no risk of dissipation, and non-disclosure were rejected.