In Dawidowicz v. Dawidowicz, No. A-6231-08 (App. Div. July 22, 2011), a dispute over United Parcel Service ("UPS") stock broke out between the plaintiff, the decedent's widow and administratrix of his estate, and the defendants, decedent's son and daughter-in-law.  Even though it was undisputed that the estate was entitled to the UPS stock shares, the defendants refused to return the stock voluntarily; thus, the plaintiff had to file suit seeking its return.

Ultimately, a settlement agreement resolving the litigation was placed on the record, at which time both parties were represented by counsel.  Counsel for the plaintiff then sent a stipulation of dismissal and a consent order to the defendants' attorney.  Those documents contained the settlement that had been placed on the record in open court, but the defendants objected to certain language.  The plaintiff filed a motion to enforce the settlement.  During oral argument, the trial judge made several comments that were favorable to the plaintiff.  The defendants then withdrew their objection to the disputed language and signed the stipulation of dismissal, which was filed with the court.  The defendants' attorney also signed the consent order.

Nonetheless, the defendants filed an appeal from the consent order, which the Appellate Division dismissed as moot.  In doing so, the court explained that an ordered consented to by the attorneys for each party is not appealable.  Specifically, the Appellate Division stressed that the defendants withdrew their objection to the disputed language in the settlement documents and, therefore, did not reserve their right to appeal that provision of the order.