Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/In re Landis

In re Landis

89 A.D.3d 642, 933 N.Y.2d 547
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 29, 2011
StatusPublished

This text of 89 A.D.3d 642 (In re Landis) 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
In re Landis, 89 A.D.3d 642, 933 N.Y.2d 547 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

[643]*643As the parties concede, the IAS court erred when it acted on its own initiative in vacating the parties’ stipulation of settlement of this article 81 proceeding (see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 230 [1984]; Charlop v A.O. Smith Water Prods., 64 AD3d 486, 486 [2009]). Rather, the proper course of action would have been to hold an evidentiary hearing (see Kabir v Kabir, 85 AD3d 1127, 1127-1128 [2011]). Alternatively, the petitioner or cross petitioner could have moved for enforcement of the stipulation (see Hallock, 64 NY2d at 230). Concur — Saxe, J.E, Friedman, Renwick, DeGrasse and Freedman, JJ.

Motion to strike briefs of cross petitioner and temporary personal needs guardian denied.

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

Related

Hallock v. State
474 N.E.2d 1178 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
Charlop v. A.O. Smith Water Products
64 A.D.3d 486 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
S.M.S. Kabir v. Kabir
85 A.D.3d 1127 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 A.D.3d 642, 933 N.Y.2d 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-landis-nyappdiv-2011.