In Ostroff v. Quality Services Laboratories, Inc., (Del. Ch., Jan. 2007), read opinion here, the Chancery Court was called upon to interpret several related agreements and to determine whether to consider extrinsic evidence in the context of cross-motions for summary judgment. In the end, the widow seeking proceeds from her husband’s life insurance policy was not given the relief she requested. Her husband was a party to various agreements with a company that he co-founded but which later underwent a change in control. The court read the applicable agreement to require her husband to exercise a right to his interest in the policy within a thirty-day period but he missed the deadline (before he died).