Legal Opinion
Fisk v. Slye
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 30, 1996PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs’ motion for recusal (see, Kern v City of Rochester, 217 AD2d 918). Absent a legal disqualification pursuant to Judiciary Law § 14, a Trial Judge is the "sole arbiter” of recusal (People v Moreno, 70 NY2d 403, 405; see, People v Bibbs, 177 AD2d 1056, lv denied 79 NY2d 918). Plaintiffs cannot rely upon depositions that were taken after the order on appeal was entered. Those depositions are not part of the record on appeal (see, Skinner v City of Glen Cove, 216 AD2d 381). This…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. MorenoNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Town of Oyster Bay v. Syosset's Concern About its Neighborhood (SCAN)New York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Block v. NelsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- People v. BibbsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Kern v. City of RochesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Saferstein v. KleinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Ficalora v. Town Board Government of East HamptonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Kwiatkowski v. BertoldoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- McKenna v. GoordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Stevenson v. City of RomeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997