Berman v. Herbert Color Lithographers Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Berman v. Herbert Color Lithographers Corp.

222 A.D.2d 640, 636 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13927

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 29, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 222 A.D.2d 640 (Berman v. Herbert Color Lithographers Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Berman v. Herbert Color Lithographers Corp., 222 A.D.2d 640, 636 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13927 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from (1) a decision of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Saladino, J.), dated April 26, 1994, and (2) a judgment of the same court (McGinity, J.), dated July 6, 1994, which, after a nonjury trial and upon a determination by the Trial Justice that the plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, as no appeal lies from a decision (see, Schicchi v Green Constr. Corp., 100 AD2d 509); and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

There is no merit to the plaintiff’s contention that the Trial Justice should have recused himself because of past friction with one of the attorneys representing the plaintiff. Where, as here, no statutory ground for disqualification was present (see, Judiciary Law § 14), it is up to the conscience and discretion of the court to determine whether or not it should recuse itself (see, People v Moreno, 70 NY2d 403; People v Hoehne, 203 AD2d 480). We conclude that the Trial Justice properly refused to recuse himself.

We also agree with the Trial Justice’s determination that the defendant did not breach any duty to the plaintiff. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from (1) a decision of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Saladino, J.), dated April 26, 1994, and (2) a judgment of the same court (McGinity, J.), dated July 6, 1994, which, after a nonjury trial and upon a determination by the Trial Justice that the plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, as no appeal lies from a decision (see, Schicchi v Green Constr. Corp., 100 AD2d 509); and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

There is no merit to the plaintiff’s contention that the Trial Justice should have recused himself because of past friction with one of the attorneys representing the plaintiff. Where, as here, no statutory ground for disqualification was present (see, Judiciary Law § 14), it is up to the conscience and discretion of the court to determine whether or not it should recuse itself (see, People v Moreno, 70 NY2d 403; People v Hoehne, 203 AD2d 480). We conclude that the Trial Justice properly refused to recuse himself.

We also agree with the Trial Justice’s determination that the defendant did not breach any duty to the plaintiff. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 640, 636 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13927, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berman-v-herbert-color-lithographers-corp-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack