Costello v. Goldstein & Peck, P.C.

Summary

The court held that dismissal of the plaintiffs' legal malpractice action was improper because the trial court failed to exercise its authority to order a bond curing a defective recognizance before dismissing the case. The plaintiffs' refusal to concede the defect or request a cure did not prevent the court from ordering a bond, and the plaintiffs represented that they would have filed one. The judgment was therefore reversed and the case remanded for an opportunity to cure.