DECISION & ORDER On September 14, 2020, Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company (“Brotherhood Mutual”) commenced this action against Jessica Dodge, as Parent and Natural Guardian of “G.B.” an Infant, and Nathan Rogers. Docket Item 1. Brotherhood Mutual seeks a judgment declaring that it is not obligated to defend or indemnify Rogers in connection with a personal injury action brought against him by Dodge in New York State Supreme Court, Erie County (the “Underlying Action”). Id. Dodge answered the complaint, see Docket Item 5, but Rogers did not answer or otherwise respond, and his default was entered by the clerk on December 16, 2020, Docket Item 17. Brotherhood Mutual and Dodge both moved for summary judgment, Docket Items 19 and 20, and both responded to the other’s motion and replied, Docket Items 21-24. This Court then heard oral argument on November 10, 2022. Docket Items 27 and 32. Rogers was served with the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against him, see Docket Item 19-10; see also Docket Item 32 at 3, but he did not respond, see id. Because this Court was concerned about entering judgment that might adversely affect Rogers without his input, at oral argument it instructed counsel for the other parties to ensure that Rogers’s attorney in the Underlying Action knew about both this action and the summary judgment motions. See id. at 14-15. That was done, see Docket Item 29, and an attorney entered an appearance on behalf of Rogers, see Docket Item 28. But Rogers’s attorney later advised that he would not respond to the summary judgment motion. See Docket Item 30. At the close of oral argument, the Court asked Dodge for “a pleading that gives [the Court] every single provision” in the insurance policy under which she contends there is coverage, as well as where the complaint in the Underlying Action makes claims “that give rise to [that] coverage.” Docket Item 32 at 16. The Court then scheduled dates by which Brotherhood Mutual could respond and Dodge could reply. Id. But Dodge and Brotherhood Mutual never made those filings. Instead, on December 28, 2022, Dodge filed a notice indicating that she “no longer opposes [Brotherhood Mutual's] [m]otion for [s]ummary [j]udgment declaring that [] Brotherhood Mutual has no defense or indemnity obligations with respect to Nathan Rogers in the Underlying Action and permitting Brotherhood Mutual to withdraw from Nathan Rogers’[s] defense in the Underlying Action.” Docket Item 34. Based on that notice, given Rogers’s default, and for the reasons that follow, Brotherhood Mutual’s motion for summary judgment, Docket Item 19, is granted, and Dodge’s motion for summary judgment, Docket Item 20, is denied. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Underlying Action, Jessica Dodge, as Parent and Natural Guardian of “G.B.”, an Infant, v. Nathan L. Rogers and Life Church f/k/a The Life Giving Church, was commenced in New York State Supreme Court, Erie County, on July 24, 2020. Docket Item 1-1. In the Underlying Action, Dodge alleged that Rogers was an employee of Life Church f/k/a The Life Giving Church (“Life Church”), Docket Item 1-1 at 15, and that on July 31, 2019, Rogers recorded the infant plaintiff, G.B., while she was changing her clothes in his trailer at a church-sponsored event, id. at 8. On September 1, 2020, Brotherhood Mutual advised Rogers that it would defend him in the Underlying Action “subject to a full reservation of rights to disclaim coverage, withdraw the defense, and to commence a declaratory judgment action to determine the rights of the parties.” Docket Item 1 at 21. Dodge filed an amended complaint on August 16, 2021, alleging that by his negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, Rogers caused G.B. to suffer serious “injuries, damages[,] and harm,” Docket Item 20-3 at 19, which the amended complaint detailed, id. at
