| LaSalle Bank N.A. v Henderson |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 00223 [69 AD3d 679] |
| January 12, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| LaSalle Bank National Association, Respondent, v KeishaHenderson, Defendant, and Lionel Spence, Appellant. |
—[*1] Peter T. Roach & Associates, P.C., Syosset, N.Y. (Jonathan I. Ullmann of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Lionel Spence appeals from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Kings County (Balter, J.), dated June 12, 2008, which denied his motions tostay the sale of the subject premises and to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale datedJuly 30, 2007.
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as denied the appellant's motion to vacatethe judgment of foreclosure and sale dated July 30, 2007, is dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.
The appellant's contentions with regard to the denial of his motion to stay the sale of thesubject premises are without merit.
It is the obligation of the appellant to assemble a proper record on appeal (see Wen Zong Yu v Hua Fan, 65AD3d 1335 [2009]; Matter ofArcarian Sys. Ltd., 38 AD3d 649 [2007]). In this regard, the "record . . .must contain all of the relevant papers that were before the Supreme Court" (Wen Zong Yu vHua Fan, 65 AD3d at 1335; see CPLR 5526; 22 NYCRR 670.10-b [b]). Here, inaddition to moving to stay the pending foreclosure sale, the appellant separately moved to vacatethe judgment of foreclosure and sale dated July 30, 2007. However, the appellant did not includeany papers relative to his motion to vacate. Inasmuch as the record is inadequate to review thedenial by the Supreme Court of the motion to vacate, we dismiss the appeal from that part of theorder (see Wen Zong Yu v Hua Fan, 65 AD3d at 1335; Matter of Arcarian Sys. Ltd.,38 AD3d at 649). Santucci, J.P., Balkin, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.