Bank of Am. Natl. Assn. v Lam

Bank of Am. Natl. Assn. v Lam 2013 NY Slip Op 00038 Decided on January 8, 2013 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on January 8, 2013
Tom, J.P., Andrias, Freedman, Román, Gische, JJ.
8950 115035/09

[*1]Bank of America National Association, as Successor by Merger to Lasalle Bank National Association, etc., Plaintiff,

v

Chau T. Lam, et al., Defendants-Appellants, Yah Rong Ting, Defendant-Respondent, Adamar of New Jersey Inc., et al., Defendants.




Mark L. Cortegiano, Middle Village, for appellants.
Rubin & Licatesi, P.C., Garden City (Richard L. Rubin of
counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered April 9, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted so much of the motion of defendant-respondent Yah Rong Ting as sought to modify the terms of the parties' stipulation by lowering the minimum sale price of the subject property, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

In this foreclosure action, the motion court improperly modified the parties' so-ordered stipulation with regard to the agreed-upon minimum sale price of the property jointly owned by Ting and defendants-appellants, the latter whom opposed the modification. Ting did not [*2]establish that she should be relieved from the consequences of the stipulation due to fraud, collusion, mistake or accident (see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 230 [1984]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JANUARY 8, 2013

CLERK