MSMC Residential Realty LLC v. Himani

2018 NY Slip Op 4834
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 28, 2018
Docket7006N 653459/14
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 4834 (MSMC Residential Realty LLC v. Himani) 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
MSMC Residential Realty LLC v. Himani, 2018 NY Slip Op 4834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

MSMC Residential Realty LLC v Himani (2018 NY Slip Op 04834)
MSMC Residential Realty LLC v Himani
2018 NY Slip Op 04834
Decided on June 28, 2018
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on June 28, 2018
Acosta, P.J., Sweeny, Webber, Kahn, Oing, JJ.

7006N 653459/14

[*1] MSMC Residential Realty LLC, etc., Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Akbarali Himani, Defendant-Appellant.


Law Office of Lee Nuwesra, New York (Lee Nuwesra of counsel), for appellant.

Kestenbaum, Dannenberg & Klein, LLP, New York (Michael H. Klein of counsel), for respondent.



Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered on or about September 12, 2017, which denied defendant's motion seeking Justice Reed's recusal or disqualification, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

There being no grounds to allege a statutory violation under Judiciary Law § 14, the ruling on defendant's recusal motion was a matter for the motion court's conscience and discretion (People v Smith , 63 NY2d 41, 68 [1984], cert denied 469 US 1227 [1985]), which the court providently exercised by denying the motion. There is no indication that Justice Reed's comments regarding the merits of this action stemmed from an extrajudicial source and resulted in an opinion "on some basis other than what the judge learned from his participation in the case" (United States v Grinnell Corp. , 384 US 563, 583 [1966]). Further, defendant cannot "point to an actual ruling which demonstrates bias" (Solow v Wellner , 157 AD2d 459, 459 [1st Dept 1990]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JUNE 28, 2018

CLERK



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

Related

United States v. Grinnell Corp.
384 U.S. 563 (Supreme Court, 1966)
People v. Smith
468 N.E.2d 879 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
Solow v. Wellner
157 A.D.2d 459 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 4834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/msmc-residential-realty-llc-v-himani-nyappdiv-2018.