On an interim spoken-to appearance concerning the terms of an adjournment, the court considered whether the balance of an ex parte Mareva injunction should continue until the full motion hearing.
Applying the elevated Mareva injunction standard, the court expressed doubts on the limited record that the moving parties had shown a strong prima facie fraud case, and also noted concerns about possible non-disclosure at the original without-notice hearing, including omitted investment risk acknowledgments.
The court further found that, over the short adjournment period, the risk of irreparable harm appeared greater to the responding parties because continuation of the injunction could jeopardize financing, business operations, and the individual defendants' home.
Without prejudice to the ultimate motion judge, the remaining Mareva injunction was lifted.
