Dubor Associates v. Richburg

Summary

The court reversed an order granting a landlord leave to execute a warrant of eviction based on an alleged violation of a stipulation permanently excluding the tenant’s son from the premises. It held that strict enforcement was unjust because the tenant substantially complied with the stipulation, the alleged violations were de minimis or insufficiently proven, and the landlord had itself hired the son to work on the property. The landlord’s motion for leave to execute the warrant was therefore denied.

Holdings

1. The landlord failed to prove a violation of the stipulation sufficient to warrant termination of the tenant's long-term tenancy and execution of the warrant of eviction.
2. Although settlement stipulations are favored and ordinarily enforced, a court may relieve a party from the consequences of strict enforcement of a court-ordered stipulation when enforcement would be unjust or inequitable, including where the party substantially complied and the default was de minimis.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the landlord proved a violation of the permanent-exclusion settlement stipulation sufficient to warrant termination of the tenant's long-term tenancy and execution of the warrant of eviction.
2. Whether strict enforcement of the court-ordered stipulation would be unjust or inequitable under the circumstances.

Disposition

reversed