From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Myles v. Snorac, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 1, 2002
298 A.D.2d 969 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

CA 02-00700

October 1, 2002.

Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Howe, J.), entered December 11, 2001, which denied the motion of defendant Snorac, Inc., doing business as Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Inc., seeking a setoff against the stipulation of settlement for the medical expenses of plaintiff that defendant had paid prior to the stipulation.

BOUVIER, O'CONNOR, LLP, BUFFALO (NORMAN E.S. GREENE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

COLLINS, COLLINS MAXWELL, L.L.P., BUFFALO (ALAN D. VOOS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.

PRESENT: PINE, J.P., HURLBUTT, KEHOE, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum:

Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for injuries that Jacob P. Myles (plaintiff) sustained in a July 1999 motor vehicle accident. In October 2001, the parties placed on the record an oral stipulation of settlement, which set forth the amount and manner in which each defendant would contribute to the settlement amount. Supreme Court properly denied the motion of Snorac, Inc., doing business as Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Inc. (defendant), seeking a setoff against the stipulation of settlement for the medical expenses of plaintiff that defendant had paid prior to the stipulation. "Only 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, 64 N.Y.2d 224, 230). "[M]atters extrinsic to the [stipulation] may not be considered when the intent of the parties can be gleaned" from the stipulation itself ( Teitelbaum Holdings v. Gold, 48 N.Y.2d 51, 56). Here, the stipulation fails to mention any setoff. Thus, defendant's letter to plaintiffs before the stipulation stating that defendant expected to receive a setoff for "all monies paid to [plaintiff] in advance at the time of trial or verdict" is a matter extrinsic to the stipulation that may not be considered. In the absence of any showing by defendant of fraud, collusion, mistake or accident, we conclude that the court properly denied defendant's motion seeking a setoff.


Summaries of

Myles v. Snorac, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 1, 2002
298 A.D.2d 969 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Myles v. Snorac, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JACOB P. MYLES AND NECOLE ZAYATZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS HUSBAND AND WIFE…

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

Date published: Oct 1, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 969 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
748 N.Y.S.2d 121

Citing Cases

Eldridge v. Shaw

With respect to appeal No. 1, we conclude that plaintiffs failed to establish by clear and convincing…