DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is modified by deleting the provisions thereof granting those branches of the motion which were for summary judgment (a) on the issue of liability, and (b) striking the first and second affirmative defenses and dismissing the first counterclaim, and substituting therefor provisions denying those branches of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the defendant.
Where the terms of an oral agreement between disputing parties are at issue, a trial is the only remedy (see, Werfel v. Zivnostenska Banka, 287 N.Y. 91 ; L.N.L. Constr. v. M.T.F. Indus., 190 A.D.2d 714 ). Moreover, where, as here, the issues of liability and damages are inextricably intertwined, it is best to leave the entire claim for trial (see, Matter of Kovacik, 67 A.D.2d 625, 626 ; Pathmark Graphics v. J.M. Fields, Inc., 53 A.D.2d 531, 532 ; Harold Ohringer, Inc. v. Kass, 28 A.D.2d 1117 ).
The defendant's second counterclaim and third affirmative defense relate to the defendant's claim that the plaintiff negligently failed to obtain the lowest possible insurance rates. Since this claim is merely a restatement of the separate counterclaim to recover damages for breach of contract, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the second counterclaim and properly struck the third affirmative defense (see, New York Univ. v. Continental Ins. Co., 87 N.Y.2d 308, 316 ).
THOMPSON, J.P., S. MILLER, KRAUSMAN, FLORIO, and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.