From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Michalowski v. Michalowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 17, 2001
286 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted June 28, 2001.

September 17, 2001.

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant husband appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Oliver, J.), dated May 3, 2000, which granted the plaintiff wife's motion for summary judgment dismissing his counterclaims to vacate a stipulation of settlement entered into by the parties on June 24, 1999, and (2) so much of a judgment of the same court entered February 2, 2001, as incorporated the terms of the stipulation.

Barton R. Resnicoff, Great Neck, N.Y., for appellant.

Philip J. Castrovinci, Commack, N.Y., for respondent.

Before: GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, LEO F. McGINITY, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.


ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

ORDERED that the wife is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501[a][1]).

It is well settled that stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and are not lightly set aside (see, Bruckstein v. Bruckstein, 271 A.D.2d 389). Thus, contrary to the husband's contention, it was his burden to show that the stipulation was the result of fraud or overreaching, or that its terms were unconscionable. It was not the wife's burden to prove that agreement was fair and reasonable (see, Jacobs v. Jacobs, 234 A.D.2d 425; Wilutis v. Wilutis, 184 A.D.2d 639). The Supreme Court correctly dismissed his counterclaims seeking to vacate the stipulation.


Summaries of

Michalowski v. Michalowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 17, 2001
286 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Michalowski v. Michalowski

Case Details

Full title:CATHY MICHALOWSKI, RESPONDENT, v. JOHN MICHALOWSKI, APPELLANT

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

Date published: Sep 17, 2001

Citations

286 A.D.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
730 N.Y.S.2d 448

Citing Cases

Feiertag v. Feiertag

In any event, even assuming that the provision may be properly characterized as a liquidated damages clause,…