| American Home Mtge. Servicing, Inc. v Kaplan |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 02293 |
| Decided on May 1, 2024 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Bruce H. Kaplan, Hauppauge, NY, appellant pro se.
Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP, New York, NY (Christa A. Menge of counsel), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Bruce H. Kaplan appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (W. Gerard Asher, J.), dated August 5, 2015, and (2) an order of the same court (Michael A. Gajdos, Jr., J.) dated April 17, 2019. The order dated August 5, 2015, insofar as appealed from, denied that branch of that defendant's unopposed motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him as abandoned. The order dated April 17, 2019, denied that defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 5015(a) to vacate so much of the order dated August 5, 2015, as denied that branch of his unopposed motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him as abandoned and to vacate an order of the same court dated August 27, 2015, sua sponte, inter alia, vacating an order of the same court (W. Gerard Asher, J.) dated January 6, 2015, granting that branch of his unopposed motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him as abandoned.
ORDERED that the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
The appeals from so much of the order dated August 5, 2015, as denied that branch of the unopposed motion of the defendant Bruce H. Kaplan which was pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him as abandoned, and the order dated April 17, 2019, must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of an order and judgment of foreclosure and sale in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on the appeal from the orders are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the order and judgment of foreclosure and sale (see CPLR 5501[a][1]; American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. v Kaplan, _____ AD3d _____ [Appellate Division Docket No. 2022-00492; decided herewith]).
BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., MILLER, GENOVESI and WAN, JJ., concur.
Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court