From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Westchester Fire Insurance v. MCI Communications Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 15, 2010
74 A.D.3d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. 3033.

June 15, 2010.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered October 22, 2009, which, inter alia, granted CNA Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment declaring that it does not have a duty to pay MCI's "first dollar" defense costs and denied as moot MCI's motion for summary judgment declaring that CNA has a duty to defend it in numerous landowner actions, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Dickstein Shapiro LLP, New York (Linda Kornfeld, of the California Bar, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for appellants.

Ford Marrin Esposito Witmeyer Gleser, L.L.P., New York (Joseph D'Ambrosio of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Moskowitz, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.


The court, in a well-reasoned decision, properly found endorsement 30 in the 1992-1995 policies at issue unambiguous in providing that MCI is liable for its own defense costs. Contrary to MCI's contention, the provision is not an exclusion ( see Pav-Lak Indus., Inc. v Arch Ins. Co., 56 AD3d 287, 288). Absent ambiguity, extrinsic evidence is inadmissible. Nor is there a need to resort to contra proferentem, which, in any event, would be inapplicable to this sophisticated policyholder ( see Cummins, Inc. v Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co., 56 AD3d 288, 290).

We have considered MCI's other contentions and find them unavailing.

[Prior Case History: 2009 NY Slip Op 32438(U).]


Summaries of

Westchester Fire Insurance v. MCI Communications Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 15, 2010
74 A.D.3d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

Westchester Fire Insurance v. MCI Communications Corp.

Case Details

Full title:WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. MCI COMMUNICATIONS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 15, 2010

Citations

74 A.D.3d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 5258
902 N.Y.S.2d 350

Citing Cases

W. & S. Life Ins. Co. v. U.S. Bank

. Nevertheless, we need not reach plaintiffs’ contra proferentem argument because it is inapplicable to…

Two Locks, Inc. v. Kellogg Sales Co.

However, the principle contra proferentem does not apply in situations where, as here, both parties are…