The majority analogized Kreszko to Rosenblatt in that Supreme Court, in Kreszko, applied a 3215(c) reasoning never argued by either party, to decide a 3215(c) motion just as in Rosenblatt, where the court employed reasoning under CPLR 3212, which was never argued by the parties, to decide a dispositive 3212 summary judgment motion.
Pursuant to either Rosenblatt or Tirado, the reasoning behind the sua sponte dismissal of Citibank’s complaint self-preserved the issues for appellate review because it was pursuant to the same CPLR section within which Citibank’s motion was based and was dispositive to the action:
