OPINION & ORDER Plaintiff Global Art Exhibitions, Inc. (“Global Art”) brought this action against five insurers from Germany and Lichtenstein (“Insurer Defendants”) and insurance broker Kuhn & Bülow Italia Versicherungsmakler GmbH. It alleges breach of an insurance contract covering several works of art that Global Art arranged to send to an exhibition in Genoa, Italy, which were seized by Italian authorities upon suspicion that the works were forgeries. Global Art contends that Insurer Defendants were obligated to make payments pursuant to the insurance policy’s coverage of legal expenses in connection with confiscation of the insured works of art. Insurer Defendants moved to dismiss. (ECF No. 64.) The Court’s prior Opinion and Order resolved the motion’s assertion that the Court lacked personal jurisdiction, and withheld consideration of the remaining grounds for the motion to dismiss until such time as Insurer Defendants came into compliance with New York Insurance Law §1213(c). (ECF No. 93.) They have now done so. In accordance with the Order at ECF No. 118, this Opinion and Order resolves Insurer Defendants’ remaining grounds for their motion to dismiss: lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, forum non conveniens, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the following reasons, the remainder of the motion is DENIED. BACKGROUND The Court’s November 16, 2021 Opinion described many of the facts of the case: Plaintiff Global Art is a privately held Delaware company that sells and exhibits works of fine art and has its principal place of business in New York, New York. (First Amended Complaint (“FAC”)
16, 34, ECF No. 55.) An Italian art exhibition organizer, MondoMostre Skira s.r.l (“Skira”), requested the assistance of Global Art as Skira organized an exhibition to be held at the Palazzo Ducale in Genoa, Italy. (Id.
