In response to plaintiffs discovery demands, defendants submitted privilege logs that identified each of the documents withheld and set forth a basis for the assertion of a privilege as to each. The motion court then conducted an in camera review of the withheld documents and ruled that most were protected by either the attorney-client privilege (CPLR 3101 [b]) or the immunities for attorney work product (CPLR 3101 [c]) and materials prepared for litigation (CPLR 3101 [d] [2]). No basis exists to disturb this ruling. Documents in an insurer's claim file that were prepared for litigation against its insured are immune from disclosure ( Grotallio v Soft Drink Leasing Corp., 97 AD2d 383), and, while documents prepared in an insurer's ordinary course of business in investigating whether to accept or reject coverage are discoverable ( Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v American Home Assur. Co., 23 AD3d 190, 191), there is no indication that any such documents are being protected here. We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing.