“STRICT ENFORCEMENT” OF THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION WAS REQUIRED
After a commercial non-payment proceeding commenced, the parties stipulated to mark the case off-calendar while the principals of the respective parties resolved their matrimonial dispute. The agreement further provided that the corporate tenant – East Coast Fish Market Inc d/b/a Lamia’s Fish Market – would pay some rent, together with use and occupancy on a go-forward basis. And in the event of noncompliance, the matter could be restored by way of motion or stipulation.
When no payment was made, and the landlord later sought to restore the case, the New York County Civil Court denied the request because it thought that restoration needed to await the conclusion of the matrimonial matter. But on appeal, the Appellate Term, First Department, thought that determination was an “improvident exercise of discretion” by the court below,
Noting that litigants are “free to chart their own litigation course,” the AT1 concluded that “strict enforcement” of the parties’ agreement was warranted in this instance.
Bet they weren’t married to that decision, either.
# # #
DECISION