Opinion
December 15, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
This case involves a dispute over the return of some personal belongings the wife left in the marital residence and the payment by her of the remaining balance of a distributive award. A stipulation of settlement entered in open court required the return of the property in exchange for staged payments of the award. Neither party fully performed under the stipulation. The husband moved for a money judgment and the wife cross-moved, inter alia, to compel him to deliver the remaining personal items. After a conference, the court ordered that the parties simultaneously perform their obligations pursuant to the stipulation.
The husband contends that the court altered the terms of the stipulation. We disagree. The court's order simply enforces the terms of that stipulation requiring performance by both parties. The court's enforcement of the stipulation was in keeping with strong policy considerations favoring stipulations of settlement ( see, Denberg v. Parker Chapin Flattau Klimpl, 82 N.Y.2d 375; Matter of Badstein, 225 A.D.2d 691; Hansen v. Maine, 223 A.D.2d 675).
We have examined the husband's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Mangano, P.J., Santucci, Joy and Lerner, JJ., concur.