Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the intervenor-respondent.
The appellant's claims regarding the alleged irregularity of the Referee's sale are not properly before this Court, as the appellant failed to raise them in her February 1996 cross motion to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and to set aside the sale of the property in question (see, Dufficy v. Wharf Bar Grill, 217 A.D.2d 646).
The appellant further claims that the judgment of foreclosure should be vacated and the foreclosure sale set aside because Resolution Trust Corporation (hereinafter Resolution Trust) misrepresented to the court that it owned the mortgage at the time it commenced this action. This contention, however, is an attempt to resurrect the appellant's claim that Resolution Trust lacks standing, which the court properly determined had been waived (see also, Matter of Prudco Realty Corp. v. Palermo, 60 N.Y.2d 656; Muchnick v. Alcamo Supply Contr. Corp., 169 A.D.2d 711).
The appellant's remaining contentions are similarly without merit.
Bracken, J.P., Ritter, Sullivan and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.