Ordered that the order dated June 16, 2004 is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order entered October 19, 2004 as denied that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for leave to reargue is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the order entered October 19, 2004 is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendant.
The plaintiff was properly awarded an attorney's fee in the sum of $7,000 pursuant to a stipulation of settlement, incorporated into but not merged with the parties' judgment of divorce, which provided that an attorney's fee would be awarded in the event of a breach of the stipulation ( see Mirkin v Mirkin, 43 AD3d 1115; Shanon v Patterson, 38 AD3d 519; Arato v Arato, 15 AD3d 511, 512; Sieratzki v Sieratzki, 8 AD3d 552; Matter of Tito v Tito, 276 AD2d 559; Matter of Curiel v Curiel, 262 AD2d 639; Swift v Swift, 260 AD2d 466).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.