11-2-8352 Simon v. Taub, App. Div. (per curiam) (18 pp.) This appeal concerns a dispute over the ownership and control of a framed oil painting that plaintiff and defendant jointly purchased as an investment in 1984. On Sept. 20, 2007, the trial court granted summary judgment to plaintiff, declaring that the parties had an equal ownership interest in the painting and ordering its sale. The appellate panel agrees with the trial court that the terms of the parties’ subsequent settlement are valid and properly enforceable. The panel rejects defendant’s claim that the settlement agreement can or should be fairly construed as one in which defendant would have an implicit right to refuse to accept the painting based on matters of personal taste or satisfaction. Moreover, the alleged damage to the painting claimed by defendant was either nonexistent or de minimus, in light of plaintiff’s expert report, which was not rebutted by any competing expert. An amended judgment will be issued on remand, giving defendant the right to pay plaintiff the settlement amount within 30 days and then requiring plaintiff, in turn, to convey the painting to defendant within 14 days after such payment.
