Opinion
November 15, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McInerney, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The People's contention that the appellant does not have standing to seek a remission of the forfeiture of bail was not before the Supreme Court and therefore is not preserved for appellate review (see, Muchnick v Alcamo Supply Contr. Corp., 169 A.D.2d 711; Orellano v Samples Tire Equip. Supply Corp., 110 A.D.2d 757). In any event, we find that the appellant, along with the surety, does have standing to bring this proceeding (see, Judiciary Law § 798).
We find that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the remission of the forfeiture of bail under the facts of this case (see, Matter of Indemnity Ins. Co. v People, 133 A.D.2d 345; People v Scalise, 105 A.D.2d 869; People v Peerless Ins. Co., 21 A.D.2d 609).
The appellant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review, and is, in any event, without merit. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, O'Brien and Santucci, JJ., concur.