Trakansook v. Kerry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Trakansook v. Kerry

45 A.D.3d 673, 844 N.Y.S.2d 878

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 13, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 45 A.D.3d 673 (Trakansook v. Kerry) 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

Trakansook v. Kerry, 45 A.D.3d 673, 844 N.Y.S.2d 878 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gavrin, J.), dated August 10, 2006, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 to vacate a stipulation of settlement of this action.

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

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to vacate a stipulation of settlement placed on the record in open court. Generally, “[stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and are not to be lightly set aside, especially where, as here, the part[ies] seeking to vacate the stipulation [were] represented by counsel” (Kelley v Chavez, 33 AD3d 590, 591 [2006] [citation omitted]; see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 230 [1984]; Town of Clarkstown v M.R.O. Pump & Tank, 287 AD2d 497, 498 [2001]). Moreover, parties seeking to set aside such a stipulation will be granted such relief only upon a showing of good cause sufficient to invalidate a contract, such as fraud, overreaching, duress or mistake (see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d at 230; Kelley v Chavez, 33 AD3d at 591; Town of Clarkstown v M.R.O. Pump & Tank, 287 AD2d at 498). Here, the plaintiffs’ submissions failed to demonstrate good cause sufficient to warrant vacatur of the stipulation. Crane, J.P., Spolzino, Krausman and McCarthy, JJ., concur. [See 13 Misc 3d 1201(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 51632(U).]

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Gavrin, J.), dated August 10, 2006, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 to vacate a stipulation of settlement of this action.

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

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to vacate a stipulation of settlement placed on the record in open court. Generally, “[stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and are not to be lightly set aside, especially where, as here, the part[ies] seeking to vacate the stipulation [were] represented by counsel” (Kelley v Chavez, 33 AD3d 590, 591 [2006] [citation omitted]; see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 230 [1984]; Town of Clarkstown v M.R.O. Pump & Tank, 287 AD2d 497, 498 [2001]). Moreover, parties seeking to set aside such a stipulation will be granted such relief only upon a showing of good cause sufficient to invalidate a contract, such as fraud, overreaching, duress or mistake (see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d at 230; Kelley v Chavez, 33 AD3d at 591; Town of Clarkstown v M.R.O. Pump & Tank, 287 AD2d at 498). Here, the plaintiffs’ submissions failed to demonstrate good cause sufficient to warrant vacatur of the stipulation. Crane, J.P., Spolzino, Krausman and McCarthy, JJ., concur. [See 13 Misc 3d 1201(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 51632(U).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 A.D.3d 673, 844 N.Y.S.2d 878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trakansook-v-kerry-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack