Cohen v First Unum Life Ins. Co.

Cohen v First Unum Life Ins. Co. 2009 NY Slip Op 08945 [68 AD3d 423] December 3, 2009 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Donald Cohen, Appellant,
v
First Unum Life Insurance Company, Respondent.

—[*1] Yoeli & Gottlieb LLP, New York (Michael Yoeli of counsel), for appellant.

Begos Horgan & Brown LLP, Bronxville (Patrick W. Begos of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered on or about July 17, 2008, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion to dismiss defendant's defenses, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff's efforts to create an ambiguity in the insurance policy are unavailing (see Moore v Kopel, 237 AD2d 124, 125 [1997]). The term "disability period" as used in the policy is reasonably susceptible of only one meaning. An unsupported hearsay statement attributed by plaintiff to a purported agent of defendant neither changes the policy's terms nor renders them ambiguous (see Kass v Kass, 91 NY2d 554, 566 [1998]).

We have considered and rejected plaintiff's remaining contention. Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Nardelli and Richter, JJ.