From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Slaton

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 14, 2021
200 A.D.3d 546 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

14861 Index No. 157528/12 Case No. 2021-00118

12-14-2021

Donald THOMAS, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Denise SLATON, et al., Defendants–Respondents.

Law office of Daniel Friedman, Brooklyn (Daniel Friedman of counsel), for appellants. Schwartzman, Garelik, Walker & Troy, P.C., New York (Edward N. Walker of counsel), for respondents.


Law office of Daniel Friedman, Brooklyn (Daniel Friedman of counsel), for appellants.

Schwartzman, Garelik, Walker & Troy, P.C., New York (Edward N. Walker of counsel), for respondents.

Gische, J.P., Webber, Oing, Singh, Higgitt, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Ruth Feinman, J.), entered on or about December 14, 2020, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the parties’ stipulation of settlement, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action for adverse possession commenced in 2012, plaintiffs appeal Supreme Court's order denying their motion to vacate a stipulation of settlement entered in open court, on the record, and prior to trial in November 2019. Plaintiffs were present in court. The parties through their counsel agreed to sell the disputed property and divide the proceeds on a 50/50 basis. Plaintiffs now claim that the deed at issue has defects, and that they discovered the alleged fraudulent nature of the deed after the stipulation of settlement.

The court properly rejected plaintiffs’ argument that they were fraudulently induced into the settlement, based on purportedly newly discovered evidence that the deed through which defendants claimed ownership of the subject premises was invalid. Plaintiffs had appended that deed to their complaint, and had a decade of litigating, including full discovery, to examine the bona fides of the deed. Plaintiff's post facto arguments on the merits of the action are an insufficient basis to set aside the stipulation ( Hallock v. State of New York, 64 N.Y.2d 224, 230, 485 N.Y.S.2d 510, 474 N.E.2d 1178 [1984] [open court stipulations of settlement, are favored by the courts and not lightly cast aside, as strict enforcement not only serves the interest of efficient dispute resolution but also is essential to the management of court calendars and integrity of the litigation process]).

Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, the stipulation on the record covered all material terms of the settlement (see generally Matter of Dolgin Eldert Corp., 31 N.Y.2d 1, 10, 334 N.Y.S.2d 833, 286 N.E.2d 228 [1972] ).


Summaries of

Thomas v. Slaton

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 14, 2021
200 A.D.3d 546 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Thomas v. Slaton

Case Details

Full title:Donald THOMAS, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Denise SLATON, et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 14, 2021

Citations

200 A.D.3d 546 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
155 N.Y.S.3d 326

Citing Cases

Nieborak v. W54-7 LLC

Trust Co., 182 A.D.2d 592, 593, 583 N.Y.S.2d 367 [1st Dept. 1992] ). "[W]hen the transcript ... is read in…

Nieborak v. W54-7 LLC

"The fact that it is necessary for the parties to exchange general releases and execute a confidentiality…