Case Name: Claudio Iodice, Appellant, v. Frank Iodice, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1992-02-25
Citations: 180 A.D.2d 563
Docket Number: 
Parties: Claudio Iodice, Appellant, v Frank Iodice, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 180
Pages: 563–563

Head Matter:
Claudio Iodice, Appellant, v Frank Iodice, Respondent.

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered November 9, 1990, which denied plaintiff's motion to enforce a settlement agreement, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The IAS court properly held that the letters exchanged between the parties' attorneys do not evidence a definite, binding agreement settling the action. Particularly persuasive is the fact that the letter written by defendant's counsel clearly stated that it constituted a proposal of settlement, and contemplated that there be further negotiation (see, Brause v Goldman, 10 AD2d 328, affd 9 NY2d 620). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Kupferman, Ross and Smith, JJ.