Rotering v. Satz

In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), dated May 1, 2009, which, upon an order of the same court dated February 23, 2009, inter alia, granting the defendants’ cross motion to compel acceptance of the answer and, sua sponte, directing that the complaint be dismissed pursuant to CPLR 306-b, dismissed the complaint.

*862Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the complaint is reinstated, and the order dated February 23, 2009, is modified accordingly.

The Supreme Court, sua…