From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Skeete v. Bah

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, New York.
Dec 22, 2015
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 51866 (N.Y. App. Term 2015)

Opinion

No. 570903/15.

12-22-2015

Stanley SKEETE, Petitioner–Respondent, v. Rafael BAH, Respondent–Appellant.


Order (Phyllis K. Saxe, J.), dated September 9, 2015, affirmed, without costs, for the reasons stated by Phyllis K. Saxe, J. at Civil Court.

Civil Court properly denied respondent Bah's motion to vacate the so-ordered stipulation settling the underlying holdover proceeding, since he failed to demonstrate legal cause for such relief, i.e., fraud, collusion, mistake or accident (see Hallock v. State of New York, 64 N.Y.2d 224, 230 [1984] ); see also Hotel Cameron, Inc. v. Purcell, 35 AD3d 153, 156 [2006] ). The record demonstrates that while respondent appeared pro se, he understood the terms of the stipulation and received ample consideration for his agreement to vacate the premises that he briefly occupied as the roommate of petitioner, the tenant of record. Respondent's generalized and unsubstantiated contentions of, inter alia, intimidation and discrimination are insufficient to invalidate the agreement.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur


Summaries of

Skeete v. Bah

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, New York.
Dec 22, 2015
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 51866 (N.Y. App. Term 2015)
Case details for

Skeete v. Bah

Case Details

Full title:Stanley SKEETE, Petitioner–Respondent, v. Rafael BAH, Respondent–Appellant.

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

Date published: Dec 22, 2015

Citations

2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 51866 (N.Y. App. Term 2015)
29 N.Y.S.3d 849

Citing Cases

Alvarez v. Strujan

Civil Court properly denied respondent Strujan's motion to vacate the so-ordered stipulation settling the…