Bonsignore v. New York State Department of Taxation and Finance
Angelo David Bonsignore v. New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, et al.
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-06324
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Bonsignore v. New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, Judge Stein declined recusal because the case could not substantially affect his municipal securities.
Angelo David Bonsignore and Magistrate Judge Gary Stein; the ruling leaves Judge Stein assigned to the proceeding.
What happened
In Angelo David Bonsignore v. New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, Bonsignore filed a notice saying that Magistrate Judge Gary Stein owned substantial investments in New York State and New York City municipal securities. Bonsignore said he was not asking for recusal at that time, but wanted the issue recorded.
The court addressed recusal anyway. It explained that federal law requires recusal when a judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned or when the judge has a financial interest that could be substantially affected by the case. The court found that Bonsignore’s claims about Bronx Family Court child-support proceedings could not substantially affect the value of Judge Stein’s government securities.
Judge Stein concluded that the legal standards for recusal were not met and declined to recuse himself from the case.
The detailed version
- Bonsignore v. New York State Department of Taxation and Finance · No. 1:25-cv-06324
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 6, 2025
Background
Angelo David Bonsignore filed a notice of potential judicial conflict after reviewing Magistrate Judge Gary Stein’s publicly available financial disclosures. The notice stated that Judge Stein held substantial personal investments in New York State and New York City municipal securities. Bonsignore expressly stated that he was not moving for recusal at that time and submitted the notice to promote transparency and preserve the issue for possible appellate review.
The court nevertheless considered recusal. The underlying case concerns a final support order issued by a Support Magistrate in Bronx Family Court and continuing child-support enforcement proceedings. Bonsignore’s requested relief included staying and declaring void the Bronx Family Court proceedings based on alleged jurisdictional and constitutional violations.
Legal standard
Under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), a federal judge must disqualify himself when his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. This is an objective test: the question is what a reasonable person, knowing all the facts, would conclude. Section 455(b) separately requires disqualification in specific circumstances, including when a judge has a financial interest in the subject matter or a party, or another interest that could be substantially affected by the case’s outcome.
The statute defines a financial interest to include certain ownership interests, but provides that ownership of government securities counts as a financial interest in the issuer only when the case’s outcome could substantially affect the securities’ value. The court explained that municipal bonds are government securities and debt interests.
Court’s analysis
The court stated that Bonsignore did not appear to claim an actual conflict requiring automatic disqualification under Section 455(b). In any event, it found no such conflict because there was no colorable argument that the outcome of this case could substantially affect the value of Judge Stein’s New York State and New York City securities.
The court also rejected any appearance-of-partiality argument under Section 455(a). Although Bonsignore argued that the case challenged enforcement practices of New York State and City agencies whose revenue and fiscal systems were connected to municipal financing, Judge Stein concluded that a reasonable person knowing all the facts would not find an appearance of impropriety or partiality because the case’s outcome would not affect the securities’ value.
The court emphasized that when the standards for disqualification are not met, recusal is not optional; a judge is also prohibited from recusing when recusal is not required.
Disposition
The court declined to recuse Judge Stein from the case. The opinion does not rule on the merits of Bonsignore’s underlying claims concerning the Bronx Family Court proceedings.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.