Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the Supreme Court properly dismissed his cause of action alleging breach of contract. The parol evidence rule precluded the plaintiff from introducing evidence of an alleged oral agreement, which allegedly contradicted and varied the terms of the parties' subsequent written contract ( see Harris v Hallberg, 36 AD3d 857).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.