From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Disanto v. Disanto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 30, 2006
29 A.D.3d 936 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

2005-04299.

May 30, 2006.

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant husband appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Ross, J.), dated April 15, 2005, which denied his motion for recusal.

Frank J. DiSanto, Huntington, N.Y., appellant pro se.

Parola Gross, LLP, Wantagh, N.Y. (Barry J. Gross of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Crane, J.P., Goldstein, Rivera and Dillon, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Absent a legal disqualification under Judiciary Law § 14, a trial judge is the sole arbiter of his or her recusal. Since the husband failed to demonstrate that any of the Supreme Court's determinations in the case were the result of bias, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying his motion for recusal ( see York v. York, 250 AD2d 837, 838; Skripek v. Skripek, 239 AD2d 488; Anjam v. Anjam, 191 AD2d 531, 532-533).


Summaries of

Disanto v. Disanto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 30, 2006
29 A.D.3d 936 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Disanto v. Disanto

Case Details

Full title:DOROTHY M. DISANTO, Respondent, v. FRANK J. DISANTO, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 30, 2006

Citations

29 A.D.3d 936 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 4234
815 N.Y.S.2d 468