Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
"It is well settled that a stipulation of settlement entered into by spouses in contemplation of a divorce is a contract subject to principles of contract interpretation" (Bottitta v. Bottitta, 194 A.D.2d 510, 513). Further, "`[w]hen the provisions of a contract are clear and unambiguous, the interpretation thereof is a question of law and effect must be given to the parties' expressed intent'" (Singh v. Dyckman, 202 A.D.2d 412, 413; see also, Locascio v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 198 A.D.2d 403). Here, based on the plain language of the applicable agreements, the Supreme Court correctly granted relief to the plaintiff.
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Thompson and Krausman, JJ., concur.