Opinion
Argued September 4, 1979
Decided October 16, 1979
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, BEATRICE S. BURSTEIN, J.
Stanford A. Schwartz for appellant.
Jon Emanuel for respondents.
MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Since the parties had not executed an express stipulation of discontinuance of the action, or entered judgment in accordance with their settlement agreement, the action had not terminated. Thus, the settlement was amenable to enforcement by motion (Teitelbaum Holdings v Gold, 48 N.Y.2d 51). Furthermore, insofar as defendant was relieved from adherence to the letter of the settlement, it cannot be said that there was an abuse of discretion as a matter of law (see, e.g., Barry v Mutual Life Ins. Co., 53 N.Y. 536, 540).
Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.