Mitskevitch v. City of New YorkMitskevitch v. City of New York
Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof denying that branch of the appellant‘s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action insofar as asserted against it for failure to state a cause of action and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the appellant‘s motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the appellant‘s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ third cause of action insofar as asserted against it for failure to state a cause of action (see Light v Light, 64 AD3d 633 [2009]). There is no separate cause of action in tort for an insurer‘s failure to perform its obligations under an insurance contract (see Zawahir v Berkshire Life Ins. Co., 22 AD3d 841, 842 [2005]).
The appellant‘s remaining contentions are without merit.
Dillon, J.P., Dickerson, Chambers and Austin, JJ., concur.