Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Matthius v. Platinum Estates, Inc – Case Brief Summary (New York)

In Matthius v. Platinum Estates, Inc. (74 AD3d 908, 903 NYS2d 477 [2d Dept 2010]), extrinsic evidence was admissible because the agreement contained a general provision requiring insurance.

"Therefore, evidence of the indemnification agreement, which contained specific provisions regarding the amount of insurance to be provided and the parties to be insured, was admissible to resolve these ambiguities." (Id. at 909.)

However, the court observed that the indemnification agreement also "did not vary, alter, or contradict any terms" of the other agreement and remained enforceable. (Id.)