ORDERED that the cross appeal by the defendant Mayrich Construction Corp. is dismissed, as it is not aggrieved by order and judgment entered in its favor (see, CPLR 5511); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from by the plaintiffs and cross-appealed from by the defendant Genstar Insurance Co., without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the Supreme Court properly determined that they were estopped from denying coverage on behalf of the defendant Gaetano Vitiello, their insured, since the plaintiffs were aware that certain exclusions to coverage were applicable therein and the plaintiffs untimely sought to disclaim coverage after assuming their insured's defense of the underlying action (see, Utica Mut. Ins. Co. v. 215 W. 91st Street Corp., 283 A.D.2d 421; Brooklyn Hosp. Ctr. v. Centennial Ins. Co., 258 A.D.2d 491).
Further, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in declining to award prejudgment interest to the defendant Genstar Ins. Co. (see, CPLR 5001[a]; Donati v. Marinelli Constr. Corp., 247 A.D.2d 423).
The cross appeal by the defendant Mayrich Construction Corp. (hereinafter Mayrich) must be dismissed on the ground that it is not aggrieved by the order and judgment entered in its favor (see, CPLR 5511). To the extent that Mayrich seeks review of certain language contained in the order and judgment which it deems adverse to its interest, we need not address that issue in light of our determination (see, Parochial Bus Sys. v. Board of Educ. of City of N Y, 60 N.Y.2d 539).
S. MILLER, J.P., FRIEDMANN, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.