ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and are not lightly set aside (see, Quality Ceramic Tile Marble Co. v. Cherry Val. Ltd. Partnership, 259 A.D.2d 607; Golfinopoulos v. Golfinopoulos, 144 A.D.2d 537, 538). However, where a stipulation of settlement is manifestly unfair and one-sided due to a spouse's overreaching, it can be rescinded (see, Christian v. Christian, 42 N.Y.2d 63, 72-73). Moreover, while evidence that one spouse was not represented by an attorney is insufficient, alone, to find overreaching, it is a significant factor in determining whether the parties entered into the stipulation freely and fairly (see, Jaus v. Jaus, 168 A.D.2d 487, 488). The record supports the Supreme Court's finding that the stipulation of settlement was unconscionable and the product of the defendant's overreaching, and that it should, therefore, be rescinded (see, Vandenburgh v. Vandenburgh, 194 A.D.2d 957, 958).
KRAUSMAN, J.P., FRIEDMANN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.