Lipsit v. Leonard

Lipsit (plaintiff) worked for Leonard (defendant) under a written employment contract stating that a more permanent relationship, potentially including an equity interest in the business, might be developed later. Lipsit claimed Leonard had also orally promised him that equity stake to induce him to leave his prior job and keep working, but after Lipsit rejected an economically unreasonable proposal from Leonard, he was fired and sued both for breach of contract and for fraud, arguing Leonard never actually intended to honor the promised equity interest. The trial court and appellate division both granted Leonard summary judgment on both claims, with the contract claim properly barred by the parol evidence rule since there was no enforceable written agreement covering the equity interest; the Supreme Court then addressed whether the fraud claim was also properly dismissed.