Opinion
744
April 8, 2003.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about April 10, 2002, granting defendants-respondents' motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Tiffany Bauman, for defendants-respondents.
Maureen E. Scott, for defendants-appellants.
Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Lerner, Marlow, JJ.
The complaint as against defendant-respondent insurance brokers was properly dismissed. The complained-of omission, i.e., the failure to procure adequate insurance coverage, took place subsequent to the termination of defendants-respondents as plaintiff's exclusive insurance brokers and their substitution by successor brokers, and defendants-respondents, particularly under these circumstances, had "no continuing duty to advise, guide, or direct [plaintiff] to obtain additional coverage. . . ." (Murphy v. Kuhn, 90 N.Y.2d 266, 273; accord Capital Mercury Shirt Corp. v. Arkwright Mut. Ins. Co., 195 A.D.2d 320, 321.)
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.