From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sgambati v. Sgambati

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 21, 2002
298 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-07419

Argued September 27, 2002.

October 21, 2002.

In an action to set aside a stipulation of settlement, on the grounds of, among others, fraud and duress, the plaintiff former wife appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Woodard, J.), dated July 2, 2001, which, inter alia, granted that branch of the defendant former husband's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Anthony M. Supino, New York, N.Y., for appellant.

Gordon Gordon, P.C., Forest Hills, N.Y. (Peter S. Gordon of counsel), for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, LEO F. McGINITY, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the evidentiary submissions of the defendant on his motion for summary judgment established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The plaintiff did not oppose that prima facie showing with evidence tending to establish the presence of a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). As a general rule, a stipulation of settlement made in open court by parties who are represented by counsel will be enforced according to its terms unless there is proof of fraud, duress, overreaching, or unconscionability (see Shapira v. Shapira, 283 A.D.2d 477, 478; see also Hallock v. State of New York, 64 N.Y.2d 224; Kourakos v. Kourakos, 245 A.D.2d 342; Enright v. Vasile, 205 A.D.2d 732, 733). Here, the record established that at the time the stipulation was executed, and during the negotiations leading up to it, the plaintiff was represented by counsel, who drafted the stipulation. The plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly entered into the stipulation in open court, and indicated that she was satisfied with the stipulation and her counsel's representation, and that her judgment was not impaired. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint.

The plaintiff's remaining contention is academic in light of the above determination.

SANTUCCI, J.P., O'BRIEN, McGINITY and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sgambati v. Sgambati

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 21, 2002
298 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Sgambati v. Sgambati

Case Details

Full title:JOYCE SGAMBATI, appellant, v. JAMES SGAMBATI, respondent

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

Date published: Oct 21, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
748 N.Y.S.2d 872