Anthony Lin in the NYLJ reports today that a Surrogate has recused himself over whether an attorney appearing before him made significant campaign contributions,  This appears to be happening more often, and when tied in with Clarence Norman style issues [insider attorneys, connections between judges and election payments] may well become a legal malpractice issue when a case goes sour.

"Suffolk County Surrogate John M. Czygier Jr. has removed himself from a case after receiving a recusal motion claiming that more than $29,000 in contributions from a lawyer appearing before him and the lawyer’s firm raised questions about the judge’s impartiality.

Rather than ruling on the merits, Surrogate Czygier (See Profile) stepped down because he would have had to review contribution records from his 2001 campaign to make a decision.

Under the state’s Rules Governing Judicial Conduct, the surrogate wrote, he "is prohibited" from viewing those records, he concluded in Matter of Michiel, 527 A 2005. "