DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
"Whether or not a writing is ambiguous is a question of law to be resolved by the courts" (W.W.W. Assocs. v. Giancontieri, 77 N.Y.2d 157, 162). A contract should be read as a whole (see, W.W.W. Assocs. v. Giancontieri, supra, at 162) and interpreted so as to give effect to the intention in the unequivocal language employed (see, Matter of Wallace v. 600 Partners Co. of North Amer., 86 N.Y.2d 543, 548; Breed v. Insurance Co., 46 N.Y.2d 351, 355; Matter of Building A Rainbow Realty Corp. v. Flushing Sav. Bank, 241 A.D.2d 520, 521).
Contrary to the plaintiff's contentions, the portion of the mortgage loan agreement which sets forth how payments are to be allocated is not ambiguous. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law, dismissing the complaint.