Which of the following scenarios would not be subject to the statute of frauds

When Does a Contract Exist?

When a party files a suit claiming a breach of contract, the first question the judge must answer is whether a contract existed between the parties. The complaining party must prove four elements to show that a contract existed:

1. Offer - One of the parties made a promise to do or refrain from doing some specified action in the future.

2. Consideration - Something of value was promised in exchange for the specified action or nonaction. This can take the form of a significant expenditure of money or effort, a promise to perform some service, an agreement not to do something, or reliance on the promise. Consideration is the value that induces the parties to enter into the contract.

The existence of consideration distinguishes a contract from a gift. A gift is a voluntary and gratuitous transfer of property from one person to another, without something of value promised in return. Failure to follow through on a promise to make a gift is not enforceable as a breach of contract because there is no consideration for the promise.

3. Acceptance - The offer was accepted unambiguously. Acceptance may be expressed through words, deeds or performance as called for in the contract. Generally, the acceptance must mirror the terms of the offer. If not, the acceptance is viewed as a rejection and counteroffer.

If the contract involves a sale of goods (i.e. items that are movable) between merchants, then the acceptance does not have to mirror the terms of the offer for a valid contract to exist, unless:

(a) the terms of the acceptance significantly alter the original contract; or
(b) the offeror objects within a reasonable time.

4. Mutuality - The contracting parties had “a meeting of the minds” regarding the agreement. This means the parties understood and agreed to the basic substance and terms of the contract.

When the complaining party provides proof that all of these elements occurred, that party meets its burden of making a prima facie case that a contract existed. For a defending party to challenge the existence of the contract, that party must provide evidence undermining one or more elements.

Does a Contract Have to be Written?

In general, there is no requirement that a contract be in writing. Although the Statute of Frauds requires certain types of contracts to be in writing, New Mexico recognizes and enforces oral contracts in some situations where the Statute of Frauds does not apply.

One important difference between oral and written contracts is the statute of limitations that creates deadlines for filing lawsuits concerning the contract. For oral contracts, the statute of limitations is four years. NMSA §37-1-4. For written contracts, the general statute of limitations is six years. NMSA §37-1-3. However, if the written contract is for the sale of goods, the statute of limitations is four years unless the parties contract for a shorter period. NMSA §55-2-725. The shorter period cannot be less than one year.

How Is a Contract Interpreted?

The court reads the contract as a whole and according to the ordinary meaning of the words. Generally, the meaning of a contract is determined by looking at the intentions of the parties at the time of the contract’s creation. When the intention of the parties is unclear, courts look to any custom and usage in a particular business and in a particular locale that might help determine the intention. For oral contracts, courts may determine the intention of the parties by considering the circumstances of the contract’s formation, as well as the course of dealing between the parties.

THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS [4319]

����� Statute of Frauds: A statute which requires certain types of contracts to be in writing in order to be enforceable.

�        Although statutes of frauds vary somewhat from state to state, the following types of contracts must be in writing to be enforceable:

(1)�� contracts for the sale or lease of, or a mortgage on, real property (e.g., land, fixtures);

(2)�� contracts that cannot, by their terms, be performed within one year after the date the contract was formed;

(3)�� collateral contracts, such as promises to answer for or guaranty the debt or duty of another person;

(4)�� promises made in consideration of marriage (i.e., prenuptial agreements); and

(5)�� contracts for the sale of goods valued at $500 or more.

THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS: EXCEPTIONS ucc2-201/4319.04

����� Exceptions to the Statute of Frauds: A contract which might otherwise be unenforceable because it is not in writing may be enforced to some degree as follows:

�        Partial Performance Accepted: If a buyer has taken partial possession of real or personal property and paid that part of the contract price attributable to the property received, and if the parties cannot be returned to their pre-contractual positions, a court may order that the remainder of the contract be specifically performed -�that is, performed according to the precise terms of the contract.

����� Under the Uniform Commercial Code, an oral contract is enforceable to the extent that the seller has accepted payment or the buyer has accepted delivery of the goods covered by the oral contract.

����� Promissory Estoppel: If a promisor makes a promise on which the promisee justifiably relies to the promisee�s detriment, the promisor may be estoppedfrom denying the existence and validity of the contract.

THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS:

SUFFICIENCY OF THE WRITING

����� A written contract, signed by both parties, satisfies the requirements of the statute of frauds. What else will suffice?

�        A writing signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought;

����� A confirmation, invoice, sales slip, check, or fax, or any combination thereof; or

�        Several documents which, in combination, provide the terms for an agreement.

����� An agreement does not need to be signed at the bottom, but may be signed anywhere on the agreement; moreover, initials will suffice where there is no signature.

����� The writing(s) need only contain the essential terms of the contract: name of the parties, subject matter, quantity, and consideration.

����� Whether price is an �essential� term depends on the type of contract in question.

THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE� 4320

������ Parol Evidence Rule: A substantive rule of contract law under which a court will not admit evidence of the parties� prior negotiations, prior oral or written agreements, or contemporaneous oral agreements if that evidence contra�dicts or varies the terms of a written contract.

����� Integration: The determination of whether parol evidence will be considered revolves around the court�s determination of whether the written contract is integrated -- that is, if it constitutes the final expression of the parties� agreement.

THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE: EXCEPTIONS 4320.04

>���� Courts have recognized numerous exceptions to the operation of the parol evidence rule. In addition, there are certain statutory exceptions which apply to contracts under the Uniform Commercial Code. Among the better-established exceptions are the following:

����� Evidence of subsequent modification;

����� Evidence of mistake, fraud, or misrepresentation in the formation of the written contract;

����� Evidence which may resolve an ambiguity and/or fill in a missing term or condition in the written contract;

����� Evidence of prior dealing between the parties, usage of trade in the relevant locale and/or trade, and course of performance under the contract by the parties;

����� Evidence of an oral condition precedent to the written contract; and

����� Evidence of an obvious or gross clerical error.

Which of the following are an exception to the Statute of Frauds?

Which contract is not covered under the Statute of Frauds quizlet?

What is an exception to the Statute of Frauds quizlet?

Which of the following types of agreements according to the Statute of Frauds need to be in writing?