Evidence · MBE-tested

Donald Cohen, Appellant, v. First Unum Life Insurance Company, Respondent

68 A.D.3d 423888 N.Y.S.2d 747·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2009·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Donald Cohen, Appellant, v First Unum Life Insurance Company, Respondent. [888 NYS2d 747] [MAJORITY] Plaintiff’s efforts to create an ambiguity in the insurance policy are unavailing (see Moore v Kopel, 237 AD2d 124, 125 [1997]). The term “disability period” as used in the policy is reasonably susceptible of only one meaning. An unsupported hearsay statement attributed by plaintiff to a purported agent of defendant neither changes the policy’s terms nor renders them ambiguous (see Kass v Kass, 91 NY2d 554, 566 [1998]). We have considered and rejected plaintiffs remaining contention. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Nardelli and Richter, JJ.