Susan von Ohlen, Great Neck, NY, for appellant.

Bronster LLP, New York, NY (Alexandra C. Mink of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Ninth Street Corp. appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Noach Dear, J.), both dated March 13, 2019. The first order, insofar as appealed from, granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment on the amended complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Ninth Street Corp., to strike that defendant's answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims, and for an order of reference, and denied that defendant's cross motion to compel discovery. The second order, insofar as appealed from, granted the same relief to the plaintiff and referred the matter to a referee to compute the amount due to the plaintiff.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The appeals from the orders must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of the order and judgment of foreclosure and sale in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248 [1976]). The issues raised on the appeals from the orders are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the order and judgment of foreclosure and sale (CIT Bank, N.A. v Fernandez, 203 AD3d 876 [2022] [decided herewith]; see CPLR 5501 [a] [1]). Chambers, J.P., Roman, Genovesi and Dowling, JJ., concur.