Opinion
June 6, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
It is well settled that an insurance agent has a duty to provide skill, care, and diligence in procuring effective coverage for the insured (see, Port Clyde Foods v Holiday Syrups, 563 F. Supp. 893; Barile v Wright, 256 N.Y. 1; Associates Commercial Corp. v White, 80 A.D.2d 570). The plaintiffs failed to adduce sufficient proof that the defendant agency breached the duties imposed by the agreement to procure insurance and failed to prove a breach of a legally cognizable duty of care owed by the defendant to them (see, MacDonald v Carpenter Pelton, 31 A.D.2d 952). Moreover, the record reveals that the plaintiffs were provided with information concerning the nature and extent of the coverage in effect prior to the time of the loss and failed to raise any objection thereto. Accordingly, the complaint was properly dismissed.
Nor does the record contain any evidence to support the plaintiffs' counterclaim against the third-party defendant fourth-party plaintiff. Thompson, J.P., Weinstein, Eiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.