Majority
—In an action to rescind a stipula
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and are not lightly set aside (see, Quality Ceramic Tile & Marble Co. v Cherry Val. Ltd. Partnership, 259 AD2d 607 ; Golfinopoulos v Golfinopoulos, 144 AD2d 537 , 538). However, where a stipulation of settlement is manifestly unfair and one-sided due to a spouse’s overreaching, it can be rescinded (see, Christian v Christian, 42 NY2d 63 , 72-73). Moreover, while evidence that one spouse was not represented by an attorney is insufficient, alone, to find overreaching, it is a significant factor in determining whether the parties entered into the stipulation freely and fairly (see, Jaus v Jaus, 168 AD2d 487 , 488). The record supports the Supreme Court’s finding that the stipulation of settlement was unconscionable and the product of the defendant’s overreaching, and that it should, therefore, be rescinded (see, Vandenburgh v Vandenburgh, 194 AD2d 957 , 958). Krausman, J.P., Friedmann, Adams and Crane, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Golfinopoulos v. Golfinopoulos 144 AD2d 537 at 538 p. 480
- Christian v. Christian 42 NY2d 63 at 72-73 p. 480
- Jaus v. Jaus 168 AD2d 487 at 488 p. 480
- Vandenburgh v. Vandenburgh 194 AD2d 957 at 958 p. 480