Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Whitelawn Dairies, Inc.

Eskimo Pie (defendant) granted Whitelawn and Supermarket Advisory Sales (SAS) (plaintiffs) a "non-exclusive" right to make and sell Eskimo-branded ice cream products in the New York City area; when Eskimo later began selling its own products in that territory and licensed other companies to do the same, both sides claimed breach. Whitelawn and SAS sought to introduce parol evidence that the parties had actually agreed "non-exclusive" would function as effectively exclusive (with limited exceptions), specifically to avoid drafting an express clause restricting Eskimo's own sales and licensing; Eskimo argued such evidence was barred as contradicting unambiguous contract language.