Opinion
April 5, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Seymour Schwartz, J.).
It is undisputed that the insured decedent misrepresented that his driver's license had not been suspended or revoked within two years prior to his application for life insurance. In fact, less than a year earlier, his driver's license had been suspended for 90 days on the ground that he had violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 (1), which prohibits driving while the ability to drive is impaired by the consumption of alcohol. The misrepresentation was material within the meaning of Insurance Law § 3105, and induced action that the insurer might otherwise not have taken (see, Aguilar v United States Life Ins. Co., 162 A.D.2d 209, 210-211). The insurer submitted detailed affidavit evidence from two of its career-track employees, backed with the relevant internal document from its underwriting department and the relevant portion of its underwriting manual. This evidence adequately illustrated defendant's relevant underwriting practices (cf., Alaz Sportswear v Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co., 195 A.D.2d 357), and established that the insured's true driving record would have necessitated a higher premium (see, Designcraft Jewel Indus. v St. Paul Fire Mar. Ins. Co., 59 A.D.2d 857, affd 46 N.Y.2d 796).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.