Opinion
2011-10-25
AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC, respondent,v.Philip GRANT, appellant, et al., defendants.
Philip Grant, Brooklyn, N.Y., appellant pro se.*524 Tompkins, McGuire, Wachenfeld & Barry, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Margaret J. Cascino of counsel) for respondent.
In an action, inter alia, to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Philip Grant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rothenberg, J.), entered March 18, 2010, which, upon an order of the same court dated May 29, 2008, among other things, directed the sale of the subject premises.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The appellant's challenge to the sufficiency of the content of the default notice and claims of violations of the Home Equity Theft Prevention Act (Real Property Law § 265–a) and Federal Truth–in–Lending Act (15 USC § 1601 et seq.) are not properly before this Court.
The remaining issues raised by the appellant have been previously raised and resolved on his prior appeal to this Court from the order dated May 29, 2008 ( see Aurora Loan Servs. v. Grant, 70 A.D.3d 986, 893 N.Y.S.2d 898). There are no extraordinary circumstances that warrant reconsidering our prior determination ( see Pekich v. James E. Lawrence, Inc., 38 A.D.3d 632, 633, 832 N.Y.S.2d 259). Accordingly, under the doctrine of law of the case, further review of those issues is barred ( see Frankson v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 67 A.D.3d 213, 217, 886 N.Y.S.2d 714).
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., DICKERSON, CHAMBERS and LOTT, JJ., concur.