Opinion
September 29, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from the order dated December 19, 1996, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated August 2, 1996, is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof which denied that branch of the motion of Home Insurance Company pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (3) which was to dismiss the third-party complaint and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to Home Insurance Company, and the third-party complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against Home Insurance Company.
The insurance policy issued by Home Insurance Company (hereinafter Home) to Sandra Levine, the named insured, did not express any intention to benefit the third-party plaintiffs 2nd Edition Originals, Inc., and Abie Moskowitz. Instead, the subject policy, by its terms, afforded coverage only to Sandra Levine, and to two parties who are identified as additional insureds under the policy, Auto Europa Imported Cars, Ltd., and Platinum Resource Group. As a result, since the third-party plaintiffs are not intended third-party beneficiaries of the insurance policy, they may not seek enforcement of Home's obligations under that policy ( see, Stainless, Inc. v. Employers Fire Ins. Co., 69 A.D.2d 27, 34, affd 49 N.Y.2d 924; Clarendon Place Corp. v. Landmark Ins. Co., 182 A.D.2d 6). Thus, the Supreme Court should have dismissed the third-party complaint insofar as asserted against Home.
O'Brien, J.P., Sullivan, Altman and McGinity, JJ., concur.