Ordered that the appeal from the order dated November 8, 2006 is dismissed as abandoned; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated August 24, 2006 is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent. As the appellant correctly concedes in its brief, the mortgage agreement and note at issue did not include a provision expressly authorizing it to compound interest. Under such circumstances, compound interest is not recoverable ( see Gutman v Savas, 17 AD3d 278, 279; DeFalco v Do, 267 AD2d 193; Rourke v Thomas Assoc., 216 AD2d 717, 718).
The appellant has not raised any arguments regarding its appeal from the order dated November 8, 2006. Thus, its appeal from that order must be dismissed as abandoned ( see Tobacco v North Babylon Volunteer Fire Dept., 276 AD2d 551, 552; Matter of Anonymous v Grievance Comm. for Second Eleventh Jud. Dists. of State of NX, 136 AD2d 344, 349).
The appellant's remaining contentions are not properly before this Court.