DECISION ORDER.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
Under the doctrine of res judicata, a disposition on the merits bars litigation between the same parties or those in privity with them of a cause of action arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions as a cause of action that either was raised or could have been raised in the prior action ( see Ciancimino v. Town of E. Hampton, 266 A.D.2d 331, 332; McNeary v. Senecal, 197 A.D.2d 835, 836). Here, the plaintiff was in privity with the parties in prior actions ( see Green v. Santa Fe Indus., Inc., 70 N.Y.2d 244, 254; Watts v. Swiss Bank Corp., 27 N.Y.2d 270, 277; Matter of Slocum v. Joseph B., 183 A.D.2d 102, 104-105), and the plaintiff's claims were raised or could have been raised in the prior actions which were disposed of on the merits.
In light of our determination, we do not reach the plaintiff's remaining contentions.
PRUDENTI, P.J., ALTMAN, LUCIANO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.