Opinion
January 26, 1976
In an action upon a life insurance policy, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated September 24, 1975, which denied its motion for summary judgment. Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion granted. Defendant's moving affidavits reveal that, at the time of the insured's death, the policy in question had lapsed due to a default in payment of a specific premium. The only affidavit submitted in opposition was that of plaintiff's attorney. An opposing affidavit by an attorney without personal knowledge of the facts, however, has no probative value and should be disregarded (Di Sabato v Soffes, 9 A.D.2d 297). In addition, the record on this appeal indicates that the only evidence which plaintiff might introduce at the trial is such that impermissible inferences would have to be drawn therefrom in order for it to have any effect (see Ruppert v Brooklyn Hgts. R.R. Co., 154 N.Y. 90; Grawunder v Beth Israel Hosp. Assn., 242 App. Div. 56, affd 266 N.Y. 605; Olsen v St. Margaret of Scotland R.C. Church, 21 A.D.2d 827). Consequently, such evidence, by itself, was insufficient to defeat summary judgment (see Friese v Baird, 36 A.D.2d 727; cf. Phillips v Kantor Co., 31 N.Y.2d 307) and defendant's motion should have been granted. It would also appear that the action is time-barred. Gulotta, P.J., Latham, Margett, Damiani and Christ, JJ., concur.