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 different—and were reversed.

Trial Courts’ Discontent