Moriarty and Holmes enter into an oral contract by which Moriarty promises to se

Question

Moriarty and Holmes enter into an oral contract by which Moriarty promises to sell and Holmes promises to buy a farm for $100,000. Moriarty repudiates the oral contract by writing a letter to Holmes in which she accurately states the term of the agreement, but adds “our agreement is oral. It, therefore, is not binding on me and I will not carry it out.” Moriarty signs the letter and sends it. Thereafter Holmes sues Moriarty to force the transfer of the farm. Moriarty raises the defense of the Statute of Frauds. Is there a writing that satisfies the statute or is the contract unenforceable? Explain.

Explanation / Answer

Judgment for Holmes. Moriarity, the party whom Holmes seeks to charge, signed a letter stating the terms of the oral contract. By signing the letter, which serves as a memorandum, Moriarity complied with the requirements of the statute of frauds. Thus the contract is enforceable and Holmes is entitled to specific performance of the contract. Specific performance is available because land is a unique commodity

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse M
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.