Saladino, MD v. Frank Tufano
7:20-cv-09346
| S.D.N.Y. | Aug 12, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Paul Saladino, MD, brought a trademark infringement lawsuit against Frank Tufano and Frankie’s Free-Range Meat, LLC.
- A default judgment was entered against both defendants, and the case was referred for a damages inquest.
- Defendant Tufano, appearing pro se, filed a motion seeking the undersigned judge's disqualification for alleged bias.
- The court denied Tufano's motion to disqualify and he then moved for reconsideration of that denial.
- Tufano's motion for reconsideration was both untimely and failed to raise new arguments or overlooked facts.
- The court considered the motion on its merits nonetheless, addressing both reconsideration and recusal standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reconsideration of Denial of Recusal | No basis for recusal; rulings fair | Argues court biased, ignored rights; repeats earlier claims | Denied; no new grounds |
| Timeliness of Motion | Motion untimely under local rule | Not substantively addressed | Untimeliness alone sufficient |
| Grounds for Judicial Recusal (§455(a)) | No appearance of impropriety | Claims pattern of favoritism towards plaintiff | No reasonable question of impartiality |
| Grounds for Judicial Recusal (§455(b)) | No personal bias exists | Argues judge has actual prejudice | No personal bias shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Shrader v. CSX Transp., Inc., 70 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 1995) (standard for reconsideration motions; requires overlooked facts or law)
- United States v. Bayless, 201 F.3d 116 (2d Cir. 2000) (recusal required if impartiality can reasonably be questioned)
- United States v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563 (1966) (recusal requires bias from an extrajudicial source)
- Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994) (opinions derived from judicial proceedings not basis for recusal unless deep-seated antagonism)