| Vigo v 501 Second St. Holding Corp. |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 07988 [100 AD3d 870] |
| November 21, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Norma Vigo, Respondent, v 501 Second Street HoldingCorp., Appellant, and Gihon, LLC, Respondent, et al., Defendants. (And a Third-PartyAction.) |
—[*1] Herrick, Feinstein LLP, New York, N.Y. (Darlene Fairman of counsel), forplaintiff-respondent. Goldman & Greenbaum, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Martin W. Goldman and Anthony Prisco ofcounsel), for defendant-respondent.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant 501 Second Street Holding Corp. appealsfrom an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated March 2, 2009, whichdenied its motion for recusal.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
"Absent a legal disqualification under Judiciary Law § 14, a court is the sole arbiter ofthe need for recusal, and its decision is a matter of discretion and personal conscience" (Matter of O'Donnell v Goldenberg, 68AD3d 1000, 1000 [2009]; see People v Moreno, 70 NY2d 403, 405-406 [1987]; Matter of Imre v Johnson, 54 AD3d427 [2008]). Here, the appellant failed to set forth any proof of bias or prejudice in supportof its motion for recusal (see Gihon,LLC v 501 Second St., LLC, 77 AD3d 709 [2010]; Daulat v Helms Bros., Inc., 57 AD3d 938 [2008]; Matter of Alizia McK., 25 AD3d429 [2006]).
The appellant's remaining contentions are either not properly before this Court or withoutmerit. Dillon, J.P., Florio, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.