From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gotard v. Gotard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 17, 1990
165 A.D.2d 824 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

September 17, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On April 14, 1988, the parties appeared before the Supreme Court, Queens County, and placed a stipulation of settlement on the record in open court. Approximately four months later, the defendant moved to set aside the stipulation, arguing, inter alia, that (1) it was unfair, unconscionable and inadequate, (2) she was pressured into settlement by the court, and (3) her attorney was unable to confer adequately with her. The Supreme Court denied the defendant's motion, holding that she failed to establish her entitlement to vacatur of the stipulation.

Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the Supreme Court properly declined to set aside the stipulation of settlement. At the time the subject stipulation was placed upon the record in open court, the defendant, who was represented by competent counsel, specifically stated in response to the court's repeated inquiries, that she had discussed the settlement with her attorney and understood its terms. As we have recently observed, "[i]t is well settled that stipulations of settlement meet with judicial favor, especially where, as here, the terms are read into the record in open court and the party seeking to vacate the stipulation was represented by competent counsel" (Bossom v. Bossom, 141 A.D.2d 794, 795; see, Swanson v. Bryant, 160 A.D.2d 999; see also, Hallock v. State of New York, 64 N.Y.2d 224, 230; Weiss v. 103 Cent. Park W. Corp., 150 A.D.2d 678, 679). Moreover, "[o]nly where there is cause sufficient to invalidate a contract, such as fraud, collusion, mistake or accident, will a party be relieved from the consequences of a stipulation made during litigation" (Hallock v. State of New York, supra, at 230). The defendant did not allege sufficient cause to set aside the stipulation of settlement.

The defendant's remaining contention refers to a matter dehors the record and therefore cannot be reviewed on this appeal. Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Lawrence and O'Brien, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gotard v. Gotard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 17, 1990
165 A.D.2d 824 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Gotard v. Gotard

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD GOTARD, Respondent, v. ANN GOTARD, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Sep 17, 1990

Citations

165 A.D.2d 824 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
560 N.Y.S.2d 204

Citing Cases

Whang v. Bailey

The courts favor enforcement of stipulations and a party will not be relieved from the stipulation entered…

Tornheim v. Tornheim

Entry of a money judgment for child support and maintenance arrears due and owing to the defendant was proper…