Opinion
November 29, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The issue raised on this appeal is the interpretation of an insurance agents' and brokers' errors-and-omissions insurance policy issued by the plaintiff to the defendant Mishkin Barclay, Inc., and a subsequent endorsement issued by the plaintiff to the defendants Mishkin Barclay, Inc., and Alliance Brokerage Corp., upon their merger. Contrary to the appellants' contentions, the language of the policy and the endorsement clearly and unambiguously exclude the claim in question. This Court has previously stated that "`ambiguity in policy provisions should not be found where none in fact exists'" (Lane v Bankers Life Cas. Co., 111 A.D.2d 371, 372, quoting from Acorn Ponds v Hartford Ins. Co., 105 A.D.2d 723, 724). The appellants' interpretation of the policy and endorsement is clearly contrary to their plain meaning. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff. Bracken, J.P., Miller, Lawrence and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.