In a Decision – Karpman v. Karpman (an Unreported Decision Case) >> the Court Held:
The parties with counsel were ordered to attend Mediation/Arbitration. The parties through counsel stated that they understood the ‘agreement’. No agreement was placed on the record or reduced to a writing by the arbitrator. The parties decided to execute a consent order memorializing the agreement at a later date, but were unable to agree to a consent order. The Appellate Division remarked that Wifes reliance on the arbitrator's statement of reasons was not competent evidence and could not support her argument in favor of an enforceable settlement. Moreover, the Appellate Division found there was no meeting of the minds as to material terms of an agreement. As such, the Appellate Division reversed as it disagreed with the family part judge's decision to enforce certain terms admittedly agreed to by the parties.
The Appellate Division determined that that there was no meeting of the minds as to an agreement on all issues by the parties. Either there was an agreement by the parties as to all terms or there was no agreement between the parties. The parties failed to achieve an enforceable settlement on all issues.