Quiz 17: Writing, Electronic Forms, and Interpretation of Contracts
Statute of frauds A contract may be an oral contract or a written. However, in certain situations, only written contracts are enforceable and thus required to be signed by parties involved in a contract. Such types of contracts are included in statute of frauds. Article 2 Section 201 of UCC, states that contracts where sale price of goods valued $500 or more, must be made in writing. If it is not so, it cannot be legally enforced. Thus, option a stating "All contracts involving consideration of more than $500 must be in writing" is false. Statute of frauds, as per its requirements, also states to include those contracts which cannot be performed within one year after its execution. In other words, those contracts, which cannot be performed within one year from the date of existence, should be made in writing to be legally enforceable. Thus, option c stating "The statute of frauds applies to contracts that can be fully performed within one year from the date they are made" is false. Every contract has some terms and conditions, which are binding on both the parties involved in it. Such terms and conditions should be mentioned in the contract document itself as it is going to be binding on parties involved. In case, such terms are found at some other document, it may lose its authenticity and thus, parties cannot be forced to perform on those terms which they did not find in the contract document itself. Thus, such terms play very important role and thus should be treated accordingly. Hence, option d stating "The contract terms may be stated in more than one document" is false. A contract is an agreement between two or more parties which is based on certain terms and conditions and is legally binding on the parties involved in it. Such contracts should need to be in written form which is required to be signed by all the parties. Signing by the parties confirms the parties' consent to contracts terms and make them liable for any non-adherence to any terms and conditions. Thus, a contract should be signed by all the parties involved in it to make it a legally enforceable document in case of any breach of contract. Hence, option b stating "The contract terms may be stated in more than one document" is true.
Refer to the case Brown v Kelly (545 So2d 518). Facts 1) Plaintiff and defendant made a written agreement for plaintiff to buy some land from defendant. Land was then transferred to plaintiff. 2) Defendant claimed prior to have made an oral agreement with plaintiff to return a portion of land back to defendant. Plaintiff refused to acknowledge the oral agreement. Defendant sued for specific performance. Plaintiff countersued for slander of title action 3) Trial court ordered specific performance to return land to defendant. Plaintiff appealed Relevant Terms, Laws, and Cases Statute of fraud is a requirement that certain agreements, such as sale of real estate, to be written and signed in order to be binding. Not all agreements need to be written and signed to be binding, however, written agreements are usually given more weight. Slander of title action a false claim involving that the title belongs to someone. Opinion Appeal court reversed the decision. Florida law requires that real estate property agreements be in writing. "Further, any alleged oral agreements made prior to the execution of the two written contracts were merged into the written contracts." That means the written agreement is final. On the count of slander of title action against defendant the court decided that the statement made by defendant were in error and not malicious against plaintiff. Hence, plaintiff will not recover for that act.
(a) The contract does not have to fit in a single paper. Hence, the given statement is False. (b) This a not a provision of the Statute. Hence, the given statement is False. (c) Only the party to be charged needs to sign. Hence, the given statement is True. (d) This is not a limitation to the Statute. The Statute is concerned with the writing and form of the contract itself. Hence, the given statement is False.