OURIEL v. OURIEL

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant defendant's motion for recusal. "The presence of bias or prejudice on the part of a sitting Judge is generally a matter of personal conscience (Casterella v Casterella, 65 A.D.2d 614, 615, app dsmd 46 N.Y.2d 939) and is, at best, a matter of discretionary disqualification" (Matter of Smith, 84 A.D.2d 664, 666; see, Judiciary Law § 14). The record does not support defendant's contention that the court acted improperly.

We have examined defendant's other contentions and find them also to be without merit.