Initially, respondent failed to preserve for our review his contention that the Support Magistrate erred in admitting into evidence uncertified documents submitted by petitioner because respondent did not raise that contention in his written objection to the Support Magistrate's order (see Matter of Foley v Dwyer, 192 A.D.3d 1652, 1653 [4th Dept 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 907 [2021]; Matter of White v Knapp, 66 A.D.3d 1358, 1359 [4th Dept 2009]; see generally Family Ct Act § 439 [e]).
We affirm. Initially, respondent failed to preserve for our review his contention that the Support Magistrate erred in admitting into evidence uncertified documents submitted by petitioner because respondent did not raise that contention in his written objection to the Support Magistrate's order (see Matter of Foley v. Dwyer , 192 A.D.3d 1652, 1653, 141 N.Y.S.3d 383 [4th Dept. 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 907, 2021 WL 4163791 [2021] ; Matter of White v. Knapp , 66 A.D.3d 1358, 1359, 886 N.Y.S.2d 527 [4th Dept. 2009] ; see generally Family Ct Act § 439 [e] ).