Iodice v. Iodice
This text of 180 A.D.2d 563 (Iodice v. Iodice) 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.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered November 9, 1990, which denied plaintiff’s motion to enforce a settlement agreement, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The IAS court properly held that the letters exchanged between the parties’ attorneys do not evidence a definite, binding agreement settling the action. Particularly persuasive is the fact that the letter written by defendant’s counsel clearly stated that it constituted a proposal of settlement, and contemplated that there be further negotiation (see, Brause v Goldman, 10 AD2d 328, affd 9 NY2d 620). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Kupferman, Ross and Smith, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
180 A.D.2d 563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/iodice-v-iodice-nyappdiv-1992.