As Traynor notes, California's statute of frauds
would undoubtedly apply to a purely local dispute, and it would undoubtedly not apply to a purely Nevadan dispute.
The director did not return it, paid nothing, and argued in an action to enforce the alleged guarantee that it did not comply with the Statute of Frauds
30) Accordingly, the transaction had to be evidenced by "some writing sufficient to indicate a contract for sale has been made between the parties" in order to satisfy the statute of frauds
requirement set forth in Article 2.
Based on these facts we hold the contract between Adams and H&H is an exception to the statute of frauds
[and thus a written agreement between the parties is not required].
The Statute of Frauds
formulation implies that a "writing" is itself a basic and understood concept.
The language of the FAR is clear with respect to the writing requirement and is in accordance with past statutes interpreted by the courts to be a virtual statute of frauds
Farzin, a Pennsylvania case, the court held a mailgram to be a signed writing as required by the statute of frauds
and recognized similarities among communication methods:
I then coded these remaining opinions as to the following variables: (1) evidence of a history of prior dealings and a prior business and/or social relationship between the parties; (2) the complexity of the agreement disputed in the case; (3) the existence and level of detail of the writings memorializing the alleged agreement; (4) the type and importance of the Statute of Frauds
issue that was discussed in the opinion; and (5) evidence that the dispute reported was part of an "endgame" situation involving the termination of the parties' relationship (if one existed).
In the period when the statute of frauds
first came into effect, and continuing until the second half of the nineteenth century, rules of evidence barred interested parties from testifying in open court.
not violative of the Statute of Frauds
requiring a writing as the Listing broker is licensed in New York).
If answered in the affirmative, the plaintiffs would effectively avoid the statute of frauds
requiring that credit agreements be in writing.
AFFI supported restoration of the Statute of Frauds
for contracts for the sale of goods of $5,000 or more, but criticized a provision which would 'open the door to oral contracts in contravention of the purpose of the Statute of Frauds
' and create other 'loopholes' which 'undermine the Statute of Frauds
as it has traditionally been applied.