Opinion
2014-04-23
Robert ZISES, appellant, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, respondent.
Robert Zises, Tivoli, N.Y., appellant pro se. Rupp, Baase, Pfalzgraf, Cunningham & Coppola LLC, Buffalo, N.Y. (Marco Cercone and David J. Simoni of counsel), for respondent.
Robert Zises, Tivoli, N.Y., appellant pro se. Rupp, Baase, Pfalzgraf, Cunningham & Coppola LLC, Buffalo, N.Y. (Marco Cercone and David J. Simoni of counsel), for respondent.
In an action to recover damages for breach of a homeowner's insurance policy, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), dated January 10, 2012, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant insurer established, prima facie, that it properly disclaimed coverage under a homeowner's insurance policy on the ground that the plaintiff did not live at the covered property at the time of the subject 2005 fire. The defendant's denial of coverage was properly based on the terms of the homeowner's policy, coupled with the plaintiff's misrepresentation that, in 2005, he “occupied” the subject premises “on a full-time basis” ( see Vela v. Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y., 83 A.D.3d 1050, 921 N.Y.S.2d 325;Milgrim v. Royal & SunAlliance Ins. Co., 75 A.D.3d 587, 906 N.Y.S.2d 572;Marshall v. Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y., 44 A.D.3d 1014, 845 N.Y.S.2d 90;Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Pulido, 271 A.D.2d 57, 710 N.Y.S.2d 375). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, AUSTIN and MILLER, JJ., concur.