As the motion court properly determined in denying summary judgment to both parties on the contract claims, "the statute of frauds . . . does not render void oral partnership or joint venture agreements to deal in real property" (Livathinos v Vaughan, 121 AD3d 485, 486 [1st Dept 2014]). This case is distinguishable from the statute of frauds cases Gora v Drizin (300 AD2d 139 [1st Dept 2002]) and Magnum Real Estate Servs., Inc. v 133-134-135 Assoc., LLC (59 AD3d 362 [1st Dept 2009]), where, as here, plaintiffs' sale of the real property to defendant 485 Seventh Avenue Associates LLC (485 Seventh) was the subject of a separate purchase and sale agreement (PSA). Here, plaintiff did not sell 100% of the real property to 485 Seventh under the PSA and then seek to subsequently retain a 25% interest in the real property in a separate transaction. Rather, plaintiff alleges that it intended to form a joint venture to obtain an interest in the hotel business to be operated at the real property (see e.g. Ackerman v Landes, 112 AD2d 1081, 1083 [2d Dept 1985] ["it is questionable whether the agreement alleged by plaintiffs can be characterized as one to acquire an interest in real property, as the alleged agreement contemplated the eventual purchase of a business, not merely the real property owned by that business"]). We also reject defendants' argument raised in their earlier appeal that the PSA's merger clause in section 20 bars the putative joint venture agreement, as it is well settled that a merger clause will not "preclude a breach of contract claim based on a subsequent additional agreement" (Cathy Daniels, Ltd. v Weingast, 91 AD3d 431, 434 [1st Dept 2012]). Because a question of fact remains with respect to the contract claims, we do not reach the question of whether the putative agreement was repudiated by defendants or whether plaintiffs' damages [*2]calculation was to be credited (see Wathne Imports, Ltd. v PRL USA, Inc., 101 AD3d 83, 87-89 [1st Dept 2012]).