Stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and a stipulation made on the record in open court will not be set aside absent a showing that it was the result of fraud, overreaching, mistake, or duress ( see McCoy v. Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 302; Hallock v. State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 230; Cavalli v. Cavalli, 226 AD2d 666).
The plaintiffs' contentions that they entered into the settlement under duress because they were in shock over the jury's verdict and were given only a few minutes by the court to make a decision regarding the settlement, if true, were insufficient to warrant vacatur of the stipulation of settlement. "In order to prove legal duress, a party must adduce evidence that a wrongful threat precluded the exercise of the party's free will ( Sontag v. Sontag, 114 AD2d 892, 894). Generalized contentions that a party felt pressured by the court are insufficient ( Sontag v. Sontag, supra)" ( Cavalli v. Cavalli, supra at 667). The injured plaintiff's statements amounted to nothing more than a generalized contention that he felt pressured to make a decision regarding the settlement offer. Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly denied the plaintiffs' motion to vacate the stipulation of settlement.
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.