GALESI v. GALESI

Assuming that the alleged promise was made, it amounted to no more than an indefinite and unenforceable "agreement to agree" ( see Matter of 166 Mamaroneck Ave. Corp. v 151 E. Post Rd. Corp., 78 NY2d 88, 91). Although plaintiffs presented evidence that the negotiating parties had agreed as to price and quantity, the exchange of drafts, further discussion, and the totality of the circumstances clearly showed that there was never a meeting of the minds on all essential terms ( see Ross v Wu, 27 AD3d 237, lv denied 7 NY3d 713 [2006]). Furthermore, judicial estoppel would bar recognition and enforcement of any such promise. [ See 12 12 Misc 3d 1186(A), 2005 NY Slip Op 52310(U) (2005).]