Court Opinion

ID: 9945567
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-27 21:11:20.222144+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:32.241724
License: Public Domain

Nogueira v Ery Retail Podium LLC
               2024 NY Slip Op 30526(U)
                   February 16, 2024
           Supreme Court, New York County
        Docket Number: Index No. 150618/2017
                  Judge: Adam Silvera
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
  York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                       publication.
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:58 P~                                               INDEX NO. 150618/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 119                                                                     RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

                              SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
                                        NEW YORK COUNTY
           PRESENT:         HON. ADAM SILVERA                               PART                                40
                                                                 Justice
                                                               ---X         INDEX NO.           150618/2017
             ELIANDRO NOGUEIRA,
                                                                            MOTION DATE          12/20/2023
                                               Plaintiff,
                                                                            MOTION SEQ. NO.           003
                                        - V-

             ERY RETAIL PODIUM LLC,HUDSON YARDS
             CONSTRUCTION LLC,TISHMAN CONSTRUCTION                            DECISION + ORDER ON
             CORPORATION                                                             MOTION

                                               Defendant.
                  -------------·-----------------X

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 003) 107, 108, 109, 110,
            111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118
            were read on this motion to/for                                ENFORCEMENT
                   Upon the foregoing documents, it is ordered that plaintiffs instant motion is decided as

           indicated below.

                   Plaintiff commenced this action to recover monetary damages for personal injuries.

           Following the filing of the note of issue, this action was scheduled for several settlement

           conferences and the parties agreed upon a settlement amount. In court, plaintiffs counsel and

           defendants' counsel signed a short form So Ordered Stipulation of Settlement dated October 25,

           2023 (hereinafter referred to as the "October 25, 2023 Document"). Thereafter, a disagreement

           occurred regarding terms to include in the written agreement. Plaintiff now moves to enforce the

           October 25, 2023 Document, to direct defendants to issue payment of the settlement amount, to

           vacate the Court's order not to enter judgment, awarding costs to plaintiffs, and for sanctions for

           defendants' alleged frivolous continuation of this action. Defendants oppose and plaintiff replies.

                    Here, plaintiff argues that the October 25, 2023 Document was the agreed upon

            settlement agreement and that such document "contained all material terms." Affirmation in

             150618/2017 NOGUEIRA, ELIANDRO vs. ERY RETAIL PODIUM LLC,                            Page 1 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                            1 of 5
[* 1]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:58 P~                                                INDEX NO. 150618/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 119                                                                     RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

           Support of Motion, if 14. Plaintiff argues that, as the agreement signed in court would be

           uploaded, all parties knew that the agreement would not be confidential. Subsequently,

           defendants sent closing documents to plaintiff which included a confidentiality clause. Plaintiff

           argues that such confidentiality clause was not previously discussed and was not agreed upon.

           According to plaintiff, the document signed in court on October 25, 2023 is the settlement

           agreement in this action and is enforceable absent extraordinary circumstances such as fraud.

           Plaintiff contends the October 25, 2023 Document included defendants' handwritten note

           regarding the worker's compensation lien, which was the only other material term included in

           the settlement agreement. Plaintiff states that the worker's compensation has since approved of

           the settlement. Plaintiff argues that the only terms negotiated and discussed between counsel

           prior to entering into the October 25, 2023 Document, was the worker's compensation lien and

           whether there would be a structured settlement.

                   In opposition, defendants argue that the October 25, 2023 Document was not intended to

           be the complete settlement agreement, and does not contain all of the material terms. Defendants

            contend that, at the time the document was signed in court, the parties agreed to work out the

            terms of the full settlement agreement outside of court. Defendants state that plaintiff has not

            disputed this. Moreover, defendants point to the email communications between counsel

            following the October 25, 2023 Document, arguing that terms of the full settlement were being

            worked out between the parties outside of court. Defendants state that their required terms were

            drafted into a settlement agreement and provided to plaintiff on November 6, 2023 which

            included several terms not mentioned in the October 25, 2023 Document. According to

            defendants, plaintiffs only objection was to the confidentiality clause, and the settlement

            agreement was rejected by plaintiff. Defendants state that on December 4, 2023, plaintiff revised

             150618/2017 NOGUEIRA, ELIANDRO vs. ERV RETAIL PODIUM LLC,                             Page 2 of 5
             Motion No. 003

[* 2]                                                      2 of 5 \
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:58 P~                                                    INDEX NO. 150618/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 119                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

           the settlement agreement originally drafted by defendants, removing the confidentiality clause

           and removing the signature line for defense counsel. Such revised settlement agreement was

           signed by both plaintiff and plaintiffs counsel. Plaintiffs draft settlement agreement was then

           rejected by defendants.

                   Plaintiff replies reiterating the arguments made in their initial support papers. Plaintiff

           argues that none of the terms included in defendants' November 6, 2023 draft agreement were

           material and that all the material terms of the settlement were included in the October 25, 2023

           Document.

                   Here, the Court must determine whether the October 25, 2023 Document was the full

           settlement agreement entered into by both plaintiff and defendants which included all of the

           material terms of the agreement. After a review of all the papers, as well as the conferences and

           arguments heard on the motion, the Court finds that the October 25, 2023 Document was not

           intended by the parties to be the full settlement agreement which encompassed all of the material

           terms of the agreement. The Appellate Division, First Department, has held that "[e]ven if parties

           intend to be bound by a contract, it is unenforceable if there is no meeting of the minds, i.e., if

           the parties understand the contract's material terms differently". Gessin Elec. Contrs., Inc. v 95

            Wall Assoc., LLC, 74 AD3d 516, 519 (1 st Dep't 2010). Moreover, the Court of Appeals has held

           that "[w ]hile it is true ... that stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and will not be

            set aside in the absence of fraud or overreaching, ... [such stipulation of settlement], as it appears

            from the record, ... [must be] definite and complete", even where such stipulation of settlement

            was read into the record in open court. Galasso v Galasso, 35 NY2d 319, 321 (1974)(intemal

            citations and quotations omitted).

             150618/2017 NOGUEIRA, ELIANDRO vs. ERY RETAIL PODIUM LLC,                                Page 3 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                            3 of 5
[* 3]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:58 P~                                                INDEX NO. 150618/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 119                                                                    RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

                   In the instant action, the October 25, 2023 Document, was a form order signed by

           plaintiff and defendants' counsel following several court conferences in which the parties

           negotiated and agreed upon an amount of money to settle this action. The full contents of the

           October 25, 2023 Document are as follows:

                           This action is hereby settled in the amount of $8,500,000, inclusive of all
                   interests, liens, costs, and disbursements. This settlement includes no workers comp lien
                   reduction or waiver. Workers comp claim remains open. This settlement is subject to
                   workers comp. approval.
                           Any and all pending motions are hereby withdrawn.

           Contrary to plaintiffs argument that the October 25, 2023 Document incorporated all the

           material terms, plaintiff concedes that the payment schedule and whether the payment would be

           structured was discussed and negotiated prior to the written agreement. No mention of such term

           was made in the October 25, 2023 Document. However, following the signing of such document,

           plaintiff and defendants' counsels exchanged email correspondence in which plaintiff discussed

           and requested the additional term of a structured settlement. Thereafter, additional

           correspondence was exchanged between plaintiff and defendants wherein plaintiff sought

           additional discussions regarding the payment of the settlement amount, advising that plaintiff no

            longer wished to have a structured settlement. In an email correspondence dated November 1,

            2023, plaintiff requested "the settlement paperwork" from defendants. Plaintiffs continued

            discussions regarding the terms of a settlement agreement following the signing of the October

            25, 2023 Document evinces that such document did not constitute the full settlement agreement

            between the parties. In fact, plaintiff provided defendants with a 10 page "Settlement Agreement

            with Release", dated December 4, 2023, signed by plaintiff and plaintiffs counsel setting forth

            numerous terms of settlement which were not included in the October 25, 2023 Document.

             150618/2017 NOGUEIRA, ELIANDRO vs. ERY RETAIL PODIUM LLC,                            Page 4 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                           4 of 5
[* 4]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:58 P~                                                   INDEX NO. 150618/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 119                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

           Furthermore, following the October 25, 2023 Document, defendants also continued to discuss

           settlement terms regarding confidentiality.

                    Here, it cannot be said that the October 25, 2023 Document represented the "definite and

           complete" terms of the settlement agreement, nor that there was a meeting of the minds as to all

           the material terms of the settlement agreement as required by the Court of Appeals in Galasso,

           supra. As such, plaintiffs motion is hereby denied.

                    Accordingly, it is

                    ORDERED that plaintiffs motion seeking to enforce the October 25, 2023 Document,

           directing defendants to pay the settlement amount, vacating the Court's directive not to enter

           judgment, and awarding costs and sanctions, is denied in its entirety; and it is further

                    ORDERED that all parties shall appear in room 422 of 60 Centre Street, New York, NY

            on February 28, 2024 at 10:00am for the scheduling of a trial date; and it is further

                    ORDERED that within 30 days of entry, defendants shall serve a copy of this

            decision/order upon all parties with notice of entry.

                    This constitutes the Decision/Order of the Court.

                    2/16/2024
                      DATE                                                        A'r:5AM SILVERA, J.S.C.

                                     ~
             CHECK ONE:                  CASE DISPOSED                   NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

                                         GRANTED         0    DENIED     GRANTED IN PART            □ OTHER
             APPLICATION:                SETTLE ORDER                    SUBMIT ORDER

             CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:       INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN      FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT      □ REFERENCE

             150618/2017 NOGUEIRA, ELIANDRO vs. ERV RETAIL PODIUM LLC,                               Page 5 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                             5 of 5
[* 5]