Generally, an injunction in a breach of contract action to recover money only is improper. It is well settled that in order for the court to grant a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, pursuant to CPLR 6301 the movant must show: (1) she was likely to succeed on the merits; (2) she would suffer irreparable harm absent interim injunctive relief; (3) the balance of the equities were in her favor. In Credit Agricole Indosuez v. Rosszskiy Kredit Bank (94 NY2d 541, 729 NE2d 683, 708 NYS2d 26 [2000]) the Court of Appeals held that preliminary injunctive relief was improper. Under the substantive law, an unsecured general creditor has no cognizable interest in the debtor's property until the creditor obtains a judgment. Such creditor, therefore, has no right to any equitable prejudgment remedy that will interfere with the debtor's use of his or her property. This is so even when there is a threat of dissipation of the debtor's assets, rendering the anticipated money judgment uncollectible. (Alexander, 2000 Supp Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C6301: 1.)