DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant is not aggrieved by the order, as it recites that it was entered on his consent ( see CPLR 5511; Matter of Paradowski v. Rowland, 286 A.D.2d 879; Hartnett v. Hartnett, 242 A.D.2d 535; Carr v. Integon Gen. Ins. Corp., 185 A.D.2d 831). Thus, this appeal must be dismissed.
To the extent that the appellant's arguments may be read to assert that such a recitation was erroneous, his remedy is to seek resettlement of the order ( see Matter of Gesvantner v. Dominguez, 273 A.D.2d 383; Hemmings v. St. Marks Hous. Assocs. Phase II, 272 A.D.2d 442; Carr v. Integon Gen. Ins. Corp, supra). To the extent that the appellant's arguments may be read to assert that his consent was not valid and enforceable, his remedy is to seek vacatur of the order ( see e.g. Matter of Andresha G., 251 A.D.2d 1005; Matter of Tina G., 242 A.D.2d 980; Baecher v. Baecher, 95 A.D.2d 841).
RITTER, J.P., FLORIO, SMITH and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.