Sanchez v Ngoyi

Annotate this Case
[*1] Sanchez v Ngoyi 2017 NY Slip Op 51684(U) Decided on December 12, 2017 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on December 12, 2017
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Lowe, III, P.J., Ling-Cohan, Gonzalez, J.
570275/17

Orlando Sanchez and Carmen Lorenzo, Petitioners-Respondents,

against

Ngoyi Ngoyi, Respondent-Appellant.

Respondent Ngoyi Ngoyi appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Evon M. Asforis, J.), entered March 30, 2017, which denied his motion to vacate a so-ordered stipulation of settlement and a consent final judgment in a holdover summary proceeding.

Per Curiam.

Order (Evon M. Asforis, J.), entered March 30, 2017, reversed, without costs, motion granted, stipulation and final judgment vacated, and matter remanded to Civil Court for further proceedings.

While a stipulation is essentially a contract and should not be lightly set aside, the court possesses the discretionary power to relieve parties from the consequences of a stipulation "if it appears that the stipulation was entered into inadvisedly or that it would be inequitable to hold the parties to it" (1420 Concourse Corp. v Cruz, 135 AD2d 371, 373 [1987], appeal dismissed 73 NY2d 868 [1989], citing Matter of Frutiger, 29 NY2d 143, 150 [1971]). In view of respondent's unchallenged submissions alleging that petitioners, the rent stabilized tenants of the subject apartment, commercialized the premises and overcharged respondent, who rented the "second bedroom" for $200 per week, we favorably exercise our discretion to grant respondent's unopposed motion to vacate the pro se stipulation of settlement (see 2722 8th LLC v Watson, 10 Misc 3d 140[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 50038[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2006]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: December 12, 2017

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.