Opinion
January 18, 2001.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered on or about December 22, 1999, which, in an action to recover on a jeweler's block policy, granted defendant insurer's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Lawrence B. Newman for plaintiff-appellant.
Kenneth R. Feit for defendant-respondent.
Before: Rosenberger, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Wallach, JJ.
Summary judgment was properly granted to defendant insurer since the subject policy contained the standard exclusion for "[l]oss or damage to property while in or upon any automobile . . . unless, at the time the loss or damage occurs, there is actually in or upon such vehicle, the Insured, or a person whose sole duty is to attend the vehicle", and the record discloses no factual basis to conclude that, at the time of the theft, plaintiff's salesman was actually "in or upon" the vehicle from which its jewelry was stolen. The subject exclusion, which "has consistently been given a literal construction rejecting various theories of constructive possession of the vehicle . . . applies to bar recovery" in this case (Cardova, Inc. v. Lloyd's Underwriters, 228 A.D.2d 179, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 802; Royce Furs v. Home Ins. Co., 30 A.D.2d 238;Wideband Jewelry Corp. v. Sun Ins. Co., 210 A.D.2d 220).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.