| Taormina v Taormina |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 05046 [85 AD3d 766] |
| June 7, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Ruth Gabrielle Taormina, Appellant, v Joseph Taormina,Respondent. |
—[*1] Robinowitz, Cohlan, Dubow & Doherty, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Alan M. Dubow ofcounsel), for respondent.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the wife appeals, as limited by her brief, fromso much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Walker, J.), entered July 1,2010, as denied her motion to vacate a stipulation of settlement entered into on October 15, 2009.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
"Open-court stipulations are judicially favored, and will not be set aside absent fraud,overreaching, mistake, duress, or unconscionability" (Tarone v Tarone, 25 AD3d 779, 780 [2006]; see Lukaszuk vLukaszuk, 304 AD2d 625 [2003]; Jablonski v Jablonski, 275 AD2d 692, 693[2000]). Where a party unequivocally, knowingly, and voluntarily agrees to be bound by astipulation placed on the record in open court, the agreement will not be set aside based on theparty's refusal to execute a written stipulation containing the same terms (see Pretterhofer v Pretterhofer, 37AD3d 446 [2007]; Storette vStorette, 11 AD3d 365 [2004]). Here, the parties validly entered into a comprehensiveopen-court stipulation (see CPLR 2104; Pretterhofer v Pretterhofer, 37 AD3d at446; Borghoff v Borghoff, 8 AD3d519 [2004]) by which the plaintiff unequivocally, knowingly, and voluntarily agreed to bebound (see Pretterhofer v Pretterhofer, 37 AD3d at 446). Accordingly, the Supreme Courtproperly denied the plaintiff's motion to vacate the stipulation of settlement (id.).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are improperly raised for the first time on appeal (see Gallagher v Gallagher, 51 AD3d718, 719 [2008]). Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Belen and Sgroi, JJ., concur.