Cavalli v. Cavalli

226 A.D.2d 666, 641 N.Y.S.2d 724, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4693
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 29, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 666 (Cavalli v. Cavalli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cavalli v. Cavalli, 226 A.D.2d 666, 641 N.Y.S.2d 724, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

In an action for divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated November 28, 1994, which denied his motion to vacate a stipulation settling the action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

It is well settled that stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and a stipulation spread on the record in open court will not be set aside absent a showing that it was the [667]*667result of fraud, overreaching, mistake, or duress (see, Wilutis v Wilutis, 184 AD2d 639). In order to prove legal duress, a party must adduce evidence that a wrongful threat precluded the exercise of the party’s free will (Sontag v Sontag, 114 AD2d 892, 894). Generalized contentions that a party felt pressured by the court are insufficient (Sontag v Sontag, supra), and even a stipulation which was improvident will not be set aside unless it is manifestly unfair or unconscionable (see, Wilutis v Wilutis, supra). In the instant matter, the husband has wholly failed to make the requisite showings of duress, and thus he has not demonstrated that the court erred in denying his motion. Moreover, in light of the fact that the husband received sole title to the former marital residence in exchange for, among other things, his durationally-limited payments, it cannot be said that the stipulation was so one-sided as to be manifestly unfair.

The husband’s remaining contentions are devoid of merit (see, e.g., Kalra v Kalra, 170 AD2d 579). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tarangelo v. Vicventures SPE LLC
2025 NY Slip Op 51336(U) (NYC Civil Court, Kings, 2025)
Botros v. Botros
2024 NY Slip Op 06612 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
N.J.L v. C.A.L
2024 NY Slip Op 50140(U) (New York Supreme Court, Nassau County, 2024)
Lenge v. Eklecco Newco, LLC
2019 NY Slip Op 3582 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Shah v. Mitra
2019 NY Slip Op 2739 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Beckwith v. Beckwith
99 A.D.3d 1122 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
In re Chiaro
28 Misc. 3d 690 (New York Supreme Court, 2010)
Isa Adler v. Skiros Corp.
66 A.D.3d 954 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Guriel v. Guriel
55 A.D.3d 540 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Blackstock v. Price
51 A.D.3d 914 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Ross v. Clyde Beatty-Cole Bros. Circus
26 A.D.3d 321 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Desantis v. Ariens Co.
17 A.D.3d 311 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Shuler v. Dupree
14 A.D.3d 548 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Doldan v. Fenner
309 A.D.2d 1274 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Lukaszuk v. Lukaszuk
304 A.D.2d 625 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Adalian v. Stuyvesant Plaza, Inc.
288 A.D.2d 789 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
M.H. Kane Construction, Inc. v. Byrd
284 A.D.2d 509 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Lefkowitz v. Lefkowitz
276 A.D.2d 598 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Sarai v. Sarai
267 A.D.2d 295 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Cooper v. Cooper
261 A.D.2d 566 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 A.D.2d 666, 641 N.Y.S.2d 724, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cavalli-v-cavalli-nyappdiv-1996.