Ulrich v. Estate of ZdunkiewiczUlrich v. Estate of Zdunkiewicz
Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (John G. Ringrose, A.J.), entered April 7, 2003 in an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15. The judgment was entered in favor of defendant County of Oneida after a nonjury trial.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this action brought pursuant to RPAPL article 15 to determine title to certain real property, plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendant County of Oneida (County) following a nonjury trial. We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court (John G. Ringrose, A.J.). We add only that there is no merit to the contention of plaintiff that the determination of Supreme Court (Anthony E Shaheen, J.) denying plaintiffs motion to strike the County’s answer became null and void when Justice Shaheen thereafter recused himself from the case. “[I]t is well established that, absent a showing of actual bias or a statutory basis for recusal, proceedings conducted prior to a motion for recusal, or prior to a voluntary withdrawal from the case, remain valid” (Rochester Community Individual Practice Assn. v Excellus Health Plan [appeal No. 2],