In Murphy v. Kuhn, 90 NY2d 266 (1997) the Court of Appeals found that particularized situations may arise in which insurance agents, through their conduct or by express or implied contract with customers and clients, may assume or acquire duties in addition to those fixed at common law, (Murphy, supra at 272). The Court further found that the question of whether such additional responsibilities should be "given legal effect is governed by the particular relationship between the parties and is best determined on a case-by-case basis," Id. The Court identified three exceptional situations that might give rise to a special relationship, thereby creating an additional duty of advisement: (1) the agent receives compensation for consultation apart from payment of the premiums; (2) there was some interaction regarding a question of coverage, with the insured relying on the expertise of the agent; or (3) there is a course of dealing over an extended period of time which would have put objectively reasonable insurance agents on notice that their advice was being sought and specially relied on" (id.).