Kamens v. Utica Mutual Insurance

Pigott, Jr., PJ., and Hayes, J. (dissenting).

We respectfully dis-

sent and would affirm the orders in appeal Nos. 1 and 2. At the outset, we note that we are mindful of the competing equities *1244presented by the parties on this appeal. Nonetheless, in our view, Supreme Court properly granted that part of plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment on the first cause of action.

We agree, for the most part, with the majority’s recitation of the facts. However, we add one fact that we believe is the linchpin of this case. Section 8 (h) of the “Settlement Agreement” (agreement) states: “Amendment.…