McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- Citation
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- Parent Document
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2010-02-23
Other Sections in This Document (16)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
- McFadden v. Sassower, 27 Misc. 3d 45 (2010)
Full Text
817 chars*51By order entered January 30, 2008, the City Court granted tenant leave to reargue and renew her prior cross motion, granted landlord leave to reargue his prior motion, adhered to its prior decision, and recused itself. All the provisions of the order entered January 30, 2008, other than the provision in which the court recused itself, are stricken because, upon recusal, the court should not have heard and determined the parties’ pending motions (see Friends of Keuka Lake v DeMay, 206 AD2d 850 [1994]). In view of our disposition of the appeal and cross appeal from the order entered October 11, 2007, the motion by tenant, which, in essence, merely sought reargument and did not properly constitute a motion for leave to renew (see CPLR 2221 [e]), and the cross motion by landlord have been rendered academic.