Opinion
January 10, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.).
As there is insufficient evidence that "but for" defendants' alleged negligence plaintiff would have achieved a more favorable result in the underlying divorce action, plaintiff's claim fails (see, Zarin v. Reid Priest, 184 A.D.2d 385, 386-387). Indeed, plaintiff submits no more than mere speculation as to what might have occurred had defendants conducted themselves differently under possible factual scenarios (see, Becker v. Julien, Blitz Schlesinger, 66 A.D.2d 674, lv dismissed 47 N.Y.2d 761).
Plaintiff's claim that he was forced and coerced into entering into the settlement agreement is without merit. Plaintiff signed the agreement which states that he entered into it "freely and voluntarily", and there is no proof that had plaintiff not entered into the agreement he would have obtained a better result.
Finally, we find that Justice Gangel-Jacob's decision not to recuse herself from the proceedings at this stage of the litigation was a sound discretionary ruling (see, United States v. Rivera, 634 F. Supp. 204, affd 801 F.2d 392; People v McDermott, 185 A.D.2d 384, 385, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 906).
We have considered all other claims and find them to be meritless.
Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.