Plaintiff contends that the settlement agreement unambiguously entitles her to share in revenues from any "copyrightable element" of the works defendant published during their marriage. The agreement does not expressly say this, and is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation. The IAS court therefore properly considered extrinsic evidence on the motion (see Van Wagner Adv. Corp. v S & M Enters.,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.