Opinion
596 Index No. 155050/18 Case No. 2022-02125
06-29-2023
ANONYMOUS, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. ANONYMOUS, Defendant–Respondent.
Law Offices of Jeffrey Lichtman, New York (David Gelfand of counsel), for appellant.
Law Offices of Jeffrey Lichtman, New York (David Gelfand of counsel), for appellant.
Kern, J.P., Moulton, Mendez, Shulman, Rodriguez, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered March 15, 2022, which, after entry of default judgment and a subsequent inquest on damages, dismissed plaintiff's complaint in its entirety, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the complaint reinstated, and the matter remanded for inquest and an evidentiary hearing.
The order sua sponte dismissing the complaint is not appealable as of right (see CPLR 5701[a][2] ; Sholes v. Meagher, 100 N.Y.2d 333, 335, 763 N.Y.S.2d 522, 794 N.E.2d 664 [2003] ). However, given the extraordinary nature of the sua sponte relief, that is, dismissal of the complaint, and plaintiff's lack of opportunity to present evidence of causation given the court's directive that the inquest was solely for computation of damages and that liability had been established, we deem the notice of appeal from the order to be a motion for leave to appeal, and grant such leave (see CPLR 5701[c] ; Ray v. Chen, 148 A.D.3d 568, 50 N.Y.S.3d 62 [1st Dept. 2017] ).
A court's power to dismiss a complaint, sua sponte, "should be used sparingly and only in extraordinary circumstances" ( Blake v. Blake, 156 A.D.3d 523, 524, 65 N.Y.S.3d 454 [1st Dept. 2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Based on the record, no such circumstances exist to warrant dismissal. During the inquest entered on defendant's default, the court focused solely on the amount of plaintiff's damages, going so far as to state that liability had been established. Plaintiff was thus not put on notice that the issue of liability was being considered and should be afforded the opportunity to do so in the context of a full inquest as to damages and evidence of causation.