Key Takeaway
Court ruling establishes that preliminary conference orders are binding stipulations, requiring fraud or duress to vacate under New York law.
In New York civil litigation, preliminary conferences serve as crucial case management tools where parties and the court establish timelines, deadlines, and procedural requirements. These conferences typically result in preliminary conference orders that set forth discovery schedules, motion deadlines, and other case management directives. While these orders might seem like routine administrative matters, a significant 2018 ruling from the Appellate Division, Second Department, clarified their binding legal nature in ways that could impact how attorneys and parties approach these early case proceedings.
The decision addresses a fundamental question about the enforceability of preliminary conference orders and whether parties can easily escape their obligations under these agreements. This ruling has important implications for litigation strategy, as it establishes that parties cannot simply walk away from preliminary conference commitments without meeting stringent legal standards. Understanding this principle is essential for practitioners who regularly navigate stipulation enforcement issues and need to appreciate when agreements become binding and difficult to modify.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Brooklyn Cancer Care Med., P.C. v Brooklyn Hosp. Ctr., 2018 NY Slip Op 08111 (2d Dept. 2018)
“We agree with the Supreme Court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to vacate the preliminary conference order to which the parties stipulated. A stipulation will not be set aside absent a showing of fraud, overreaching, mistake, duress, or similar circumstances”
A Preliminary Conference Order is now deemed a stipulation.
Key Takeaway
This ruling establishes that preliminary conference orders carry the same binding force as formal stipulations between parties. Courts will not allow parties to vacate these orders without demonstrating extraordinary circumstances such as fraud, overreaching, mistake, or duress. This means that commitments made during preliminary conferences should be treated with the same gravity as other contractual stipulations, and parties must carefully consider their positions before agreeing to preliminary conference terms, as substantial compliance with these orders will likely be required.
