The U.S. Supreme Court held in 1986 that a trial court adjudicating a motion to approve a settlement agreement may not modify the settlement terms without the consent of the parties. Evans v. Jeff D., 475 U.S. 717 (1986). Thus, it has long been black letter law that a trial court may only determine whether a settlement is fair and reasonable, and either approve or disapprove the settlement. See, e.g., Stahl v. Rhee, 220 A.D.2d 39, 44-45 (2d Dept. 1996).1 Recently, however, both state and federal courts have expressed dissatisfaction with various aspects of settlement agreements presented for their approval. However, trial courts’ efforts to reform settlement agreements have been swiftly reversed by New York appellate courts.
We provide an overview of some recent opinions where New York trial courts questioned the terms of the settlement agreements that they ultimately approved, and proceed to discuss the cases where the trial courts did something differentand were reversed.
Trial Courts’ Discontent
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
