Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff-insurance company's motion for summary judgment in action seeking declaration that it had no obligation to indemnify or defend insured in underlying personal injuries action, under circumstances where insured's ambulance that was involved with collision with defendant's vehicle was not listed on policy at time of accident. While defendant argued that ambulance was covered by policy because insured's agent sent email to plaintiff prior to accident requesting that ambulance be added to policy, Ct. of Appeals held that ambulance was not covered, where policy required that plaintiff approve change to policy, which did not occur prior to accident. As such, plaintiff was not obligated to defend or indemnify insured in underlying action. Fact that plaintiff had always implemented insured's requests to add/subtract vehicles to/from policy in past did not require different result.