| Cottom-Aleinikoff v Aleinikoff |
| 2005 NY Slip Op 51980(U) [10 Misc 3d 130(A)] |
| Decided on December 7, 2005 |
| Appellate Term, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court, New York County (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered on or about March 16, 2005 after trial, in favor of plaintiff and awarding her damages in the principal sum of $2,500.
PER CURIAM:
Judgment (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered on or about March 16, 2005, affirmed, without costs.
The judgment in favor of plaintiff in this small claims action, based upon an open-court stipulation entered on February 8, 1999, was consistent with the ends of "substantial justice" (CCA 1804, 1807) and is not disturbed. The stipulation was a complete and definite agreement, intended to be binding upon the parties (see Matter of Dolgin Eldert Corp., 31 NY2d 1, 8 [1972]).
There is no merit to defendant's assertion of laches as a bar to the enforcement of the stipulation. The only element of the laches doctrine established by defendant is the mere passage of time, which standing alone, is insufficient (see Marine Midland Bank v Worldwide Indus. Corp., 307 AD2d 221, 222 [2003]).
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining arguments for the reasons stated by the trial court.
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.