IAS TERM PART 18 ARI ZOLDAN v. ANDREW WOLF

Plaintiffs commenced this action seeking to recover damages based upon breach of an oral joint venture agreement and unjust enrichment. Defendants seek summary judgment claiming that the within action is governed by a written co-broker agreement that was executed by Wolf on behalf of Touch Air and by Zoldan on behalf of Launch 3 on August 3, 2002. Pursuant to the cobroker agreement, Defendants claim that Touch Air was merely a "broker" entitled to receive compensation or a commission based upon introductions to Launch 3. In other words, Defendants contend that the parol evidence rule bars the introduction of any extrinsic evidence which seeks to vary, alter or contradict the terms of the written cobroker agreement.