Summary
This Appellate Division decision reviews a trial court's denial of a defendant's motion to dismiss a divorce action based on a previously abandoned settlement agreement and its grant of plaintiff's cross-motion for expert fees. The court held that the prior 2006 divorce action was properly deemed abandoned due to the parties' failure to timely submit a proposed judgment as required by court rules, meaning the oral stipulation did not survive. Consequently, the trial court correctly denied the motion to dismiss and providently exercised its discretion in awarding 90% of neutral business evaluator fees to the plaintiff.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the 2006 settlement agreement survived the abandonment of the action under 22 NYCRR 202.48
- Whether the defendant's motion to dismiss under CPLR 3211(a) should be granted
- Whether the trial court properly exercised discretion in awarding expert‑fee costs under Domestic Relations Law §237(a)
Holdings
- The settlement agreement did not survive; the 2006 action was deemed abandoned because the parties failed to timely submit a proposed judgment, and therefore the oral stipulation is ineffective.
- The motion to dismiss was properly denied because the settlement agreement was ineffective and the plaintiff’s amended complaint was not subject to dismissal on that ground.
- The trial court properly exercised its discretion and awarded the plaintiff 90% of the expert‑fee costs.
Key quotations
“The 2006 action and the settlement agreement reached to dispose of it were deemed abandoned upon the parties' failure to timely submit a proposed judgment to the court (see Lewis v. Reeves, 236 AD3d 777, 780; Bove v. Bove, 189 AD3d 1151, 1153; Rotbert v. Rotbert, 140 AD3d 672, 672).” (at 1)
Factual background
The parties married in 1990, have three emancipated children, and commenced a 2006 divorce action that was settled. The settlement agreement was not finalized because the required papers were never submitted, resulting in abandonment of the action. The parties continued to live together and operated multiple businesses for another 15 years before filing a new divorce action in 2022.
Procedural history
The parties married in 1990 and filed a divorce action in 2006 that was settled. The settlement was abandoned when the parties failed to submit a judgment within 60 days, as required by 22 NYCRR 202.48. In 2022 a new divorce action was filed. The trial court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss under CPLR 3211(a) and awarded expert‑fee costs under Domestic Relations Law §237(a). The appellant appealed.