Mingrino Indus. 2000, Inc. v Pustilnikov, 2009 NY Slip Op 04875 (App. Div., 2nd, 2009)
In the absence of notice to the parties and an application by the defendants for such relief, the Supreme Court erred in, sua sponte, directing the dismissal of the complaint (see Ambrosino v Village of Bronxville, 58 AD3d 649; During v City of New Rochelle, N.Y., 55 AD3d 533, 534; Abinanti v Pascale, 41 AD3d 395, 396). In effect, the Supreme Court deprived the parties of the opportunity to submit their proof (see Jacobs v Mostow, 23 AD3d 623, 624; Sena v Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 198 AD2d 345, 346).
The defendants' contention regarding the statute of limitations is not properly before this Court (see DeLeonardis v Brown, 15 AD3d 525, 526).
A little procedural background would have been nice.
