Opinion
June 17, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Orange County (Sherwood, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The appellant's challenge to the standing and legal capacity of the plaintiff to commence the foreclosure action is improperly raised on this appeal, since the same arguments were determined adversely to the appellant in a prior order granting summary judgment and the judgment of foreclosure, and he took no appeal therefrom (see generally, GG Mgrs. v. Fidata Trust Co., 215 A.D.2d 241; Spa Realty Assocs. v. Springs Assocs., 213 A.D.2d 781; Cherico v. Bank of N.Y., 211 A.D.2d 961; Williams v. Steinberg, 211 A.D.2d 597; Bank of N.Y. v. Route 312 Dev. Corp., 185 A.D.2d 582).
Furthermore, we find unpersuasive the appellant's contention that the order of eviction should have been vacated, inasmuch as the record supports the conclusion that he was properly served with all documents and that the plaintiff followed the appropriate procedural steps in obtaining the order (see, Lincoln First Bank v. Polishuk, 86 A.D.2d 652).
Finally, the plaintiff's contention regarding the propriety of the stay pursuant to CPLR 5519 (a) (6) is not reviewable on this appeal. Ritter, J.P., Thompson, Hart and McGinity, JJ., concur.