Opinion
November 9, 1976
Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, FELICE K. SHEA, J.
Waldman Waldman (Seymour M. Waldman and Martin Markson of counsel), for third-party defendant-appellant.
Lantner Ouslander (Morris Ouslander of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent.
Reading section 10 of the welfare plan in light of the statement of "Dependant Coverage" in booklet issued to the members of the union, we conclude that third-party plaintiff's son was a covered "Dependent" thereunder. The plan provides, inter alia, that a child of a member continues to be eligible for benefits until he reaches his 23d birthday, if he is a "full-time student working toward a degree at an accredited college or university" (§ 10, [b][3]). The booklet states simply that he must be "a full time student." A full-time, registered student in a high school, planning to go to college for a degree, is "working toward a degree at an accredited college or university" and comes within the scope of both the plan and the booklet. Indeed, in the case of third-party plaintiff's son, at the time this action was pending in the lower court, he was a full-time student at Ramapo College of New Jersey (see, also, Weinberg v Insurance Co. of North Amer., 88 Misc.2d 82).
The judgment entered June 4, 1976 should be affirmed, with $25 costs.
Concur — DUDLEY, P.J., RICCOBONO and TIERNEY, JJ.