Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Connecticut Indemnity Co. v. Travelers Insurance 300 A.D.2d 530

← Cases

Connecticut Indemnity Co. v. Travelers Insurance

300 A.D.2d 530 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 2002-12-23 English

Contents

Majority

p. 530
Connecticut Indemnity Company, Appellant, v Travelers Insurance Company et al., Defendants, and North American Specialty Insurance Company et al., Respondents.
[752 NYS2d 560]

—In an action for a judgment declaring, inter alia, that the plaintiff is not required to provide insurance coverage in connection with the subject accident, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Clemente, J.), dated August 15, 2001, as granted the respective cross motions of the defendants North American Specialty Insurance Company, Canal Hi Fi, Inc., and Anne-Marie Charles for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants North American Specialty Insurance Company, Canal Hi Fi, Inc., and Anne-Marie Charles (see CPLR 3212 [b]; Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 ; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 ).

Furthermore, we reject the plaintiffs argument pursuant to CPLR 3212 (f) that summary judgment was premature as discovery was not yet completed. The plaintiffs mere hope that

p. 531
it might be able to uncover some evidence during the discovery process is insufficient to deny summary judgment (see Wood v Otherson, 210 AD2d 473 ; Pow v Black, 182 AD2d 484 ). Smith, J.P., O’Brien, Krausman and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cases cited