Court denies motion to dismiss in a case involving the interpretation of a commutation agreement
In a terse one sentence ruling, a District Court has denied a motion to dismiss a Complaint alleging a number of claims with respect to a Commutation Agreement of certain reinsurance agreements. The Defendant contended that the Commutation Agreement unambiguously released it from all liabilities, while the Plaintiff countered that the Defendant's reliance on extrinsic evidence in its motion demonstrated that the agreements were not unambiguous, requiring the denial of the motion to dismiss. ACE Tempest Reinsurance, Ltd. v. Converium Reinsurance (North America), Inc., Case No. 06-1059 (USDC S.D.N.Y. Nov. 30, 2006).
