Court Opinion

ID: 5840990
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 23:07:40.356195+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:46.190152
License: Public Domain

*447The record evidence establishes definitively that the June 8, 2009 e-mail that plaintiff contends was defendant’s acceptance of its settlement offer did not result in a preliminary agreement that embodied all the essential terms of the agreement between the parties (see Williamson v Delsener, 59 AD3d 291 [2009]). In any event, this alleged settlement agreement was superseded by a formal settlement agreement drafted by plaintiff and signed by defendant, which contained additional terms and specifically provided that it cancelled all preceding agreements (see e.g. Olivo v City of New York, 2010 WL 3200073, 2010 US Dist LEXIS 81951 [SD NY 2010]). Even if plaintiff never formally executed the settlement agreement it proffered to defendant, the record demonstrates that both parties intended to be bound by the agreement, and it is therefore enforceable (see Flores v Lower E. Side Serv. Ctr., Inc., 4 NY3d 363, 369 [2005]; Kowalchuk v Stroup, 61 AD3d 118, 125 [2009]). Concur — Saxe, J.E, Sweeny, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.