We reject National Union's contention that the subject insurance policy's $5 million sublimit for claims that seek equitable relief applies also to claims arising from the same underlying occurrence that seek legal relief based on tort and contract law principles, as it relies on a strained construction of the terms of the policy ( see Seaboard Sur. Co. v Gillette Co., 64 NY2d 304, 311; 242-44 E. 77th St., LLC v Greater N.Y. Mut. Ins. Co., 31 AD3d 100, 103). Similarly, we reject the contention that the policy's "insured versus insured" exclusion applies to claims brought against the insured entities by individual insureds acting in their individual capacities.
As the policy obligates National Union to advance all defense costs as they are incurred, subject to a right of recoupment of payment for noncovered costs after the underlying litigation is completed, the court had no obligation at this juncture to rule on the allocation of defense expenses.
We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.