Oswego Laborers’ Local 211 Pension Fund v. Marine Midland Bank, N.A., 85 N.Y.2d 20, 623 N.Y.S.2d 529, 647 N.E.2d 741, 744 (1995); see also Vitolo v. Mentor H/S, Inc., 213 Fed.Appx. 16, 17 (2d Cir.2007) (summary order) (citing (Stutman v. Chem. Bank, 95 N.Y.2d 24, 709 N.Y.S.2d 892, 731 N.E.2d 608, 611 (2000))). To show that the alleged conduct was consumer oriented, plaintiff “must demonstrate that the acts or practices have a broadf ] impact on consumers at large.” Oswego Laborers’, 623 N.Y.S.2d 529, 647 N.E.2d at 745 (finding that conduct related to bank’s policies regarding savings accounts were consumer oriented because policy applied to “any customer entering the bank to open a savings account”); see, e.g., Riordan v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 977 F.2d 47, 51-53 (2d Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); cf. N.Y. Univ. v. Cont’l Ins. Co., 87 N.Y.2d
holding that the language of  9133 applies only to insurers and not to the insurers employees holding that admonishment for breach of insurers obligation to insured is not applicable to equitable share dispute between insurers holding insurers right to subrogation arises only upon the insurers showing that the sum of the insureds recovery from the insurer and from persons legally responsible for the injury exceeds the insureds loss holding that insureds criminal convictions were sufficient to preclude relitigation of the issue of the insureds subjective intent for purposes of evaluating the insurers duty to defend holding  349 applicable to insurers where plaintiffs demonstrated that similar practices had been employed by defendant against multiple insureds