Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed an order denying the plaintiff's motion to set aside an in-court stipulation of settlement in a podiatric malpractice action. The court held that the plaintiff failed to show fraud, duress, overreaching, mistake, unconscionability, or another sufficient basis to disturb the settlement.
Holdings
- The plaintiff failed to allege sufficient grounds to set aside the stipulation of settlement entered in open court; therefore, the Supreme Court properly denied her motion.
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiff established sufficient grounds, such as fraud, overreaching, mistake, duress, or unconscionability, to set aside a settlement stipulation entered in open court.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (5)
- Perry v. McMahan, 164 A.D.3d 1490, 1491(followed)
- Esposito v. Podolsky, 104 A.D.3d 903, 905(followed)
- Kelley v. Chavez, 33 A.D.3d 590, 591(followed)
- Sweeney v. Sweeney, 71 A.D.3d 989, 992(followed)
- Warren v. Rabinowitz, 228 A.D.2d 492, 493(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…