NWE Corp. v. Atomic Risk Management of New York, Inc.NWE Corp. v. Atomic Risk Management of New York, Inc.
The proposed amended complaint alleges that plaintiffs requested defendant insurance brokers to “insure [them] adequately,” that defendants “recommended coverage,” and that plaintiffs relied on defendants’ recommendations and advice. Included also is an allegation that “[plaintiff] NWE contracted with [defendant] Atomic that the latter would recommend and procure adequate insurance under the circumstances.” Thus, since there is some support in the record for plaintiffs’ claims that they did not merely request defendants to obtain a specific type of coverage, but relied on defendants’ expertise and advice in determining an appropriate policy limit, and that defendants agreed to recommend adequate coverage, the amendment permitted by the court was not so plainly devoid of merit as to preclude its assertion (see Garnerville Holding Co. v Kaye Ins. Assoc., 309 AD2d 541 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 705 [2004]; see also Murphy v Kuhn, 90 NY2d 266, 272 [1997]; and see