ALEXANDRA CATES, pet-app v. CARLA PIVONSKI, res-res

15-290. ALEXANDRA CATES, pet-app v. CARLA PIVONSKI, res-res — — Order (Peter M. Wendt, J.), dated May 19, 2015, reversed, petitioner-appellant’s motion granted to the extent of awarding her a money judgment in the principal sum of $33,000. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

In light of respondent Pivonski’s undisputed failure to comply with the unambiguous payment terms of the two-attorney, so-ordered stipulation settling the underlying nonpayment summary proceeding, the court should have awarded petitioner a money judgment consistent with the stipulation’s terms. Strict enforcement of stipulations of settlement serve the interest of efficient dispute resolution, and is essential to the management of court calendars and the integrity of the litigation process (see Hallock v. State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 230 [1984]; Hotel Cameron, Inc. v. Purcell, 35 AD3d 153, 155 [2006]). Contrary to the conclusion reached below, petitioner was not required to serve a second notice of default under the stipulation, since the delay between service of the default notice and the motion for a money judgment was undisputedly caused by the loss and subsequent reconstruction of the Civil Court file, and was not shown to have prejudiced respondent.