statute of frauds

Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Legal, Financial, Acronyms, Wikipedia.

Frauds, Statute of,

basis of most modern laws requiring that certain promises must be in writing in order to be enforceable; it was passed by the English Parliament in 1677. In the United States, although state laws vary, most require written agreements in four types of contracts: contracts to assume the obligation of another; contracts that cannot be performed within one year; contracts for the sale of land; and contracts for the sale of goods.

Statute of Frauds:

see Frauds, Statute ofFrauds, Statute of,
basis of most modern laws requiring that certain promises must be in writing in order to be enforceable; it was passed by the English Parliament in 1677.
..... Click the link for more information.
The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia™ Copyright © 2013, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.

statute of frauds

A rule that certain kinds of contracts are unenforceable unless signed and in writing or unless there is a written memorandum of their terms signed by the party to be charged. In most states contracts for the sale of real property or for leases of over a specified duration must be in writing to be enforceable.
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Architecture and Construction. Copyright © 2003 by McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
References in periodicals archive ?
A basic rule of contract law is that certain types of agreements must be in writing before they may be enforced.(113) Absent a writing and the signature of the party charged, a court will refuse to enforce what may be an otherwise valid agreement that fits one of the six categories of contracts within the typical American Statute of Frauds.(114) Employed over the years to guard against fraud and discourage perjury, the Statute of Frauds continues to require written contract in certain instances to "promote[] certainty and deliberation ...
Enforcing the statute of frauds under the FAR serves three policy goals: predictability, uniformity, and lower transaction costs in the formation of government contracts.(110) Predictability in government contracts should be the paramount goal of all parties involved.
For example, in Hessenthaler, the court held that a mailgram was a "signed writing" in compliance with the statute of frauds applicable in a real estate transaction.
The ideal way to test this hypothesis would be to observe a large number of actual deals and to code these for the variables--the duration and structure of the parties' relationship, the likely effectiveness of third party nonlegal sanctions in their business community, and the complexity of their transaction--which the theory predicts will be important in determining whether or not the parties use written contracts that comply with the requirements of the Statute of Frauds. Unfortunately, there are at present no data from which to construct such a sample.
If fear of fraud were paramount, then a writing requirement for all gifts, expanding on the statute of frauds, might do more good than a delivery requirement.
The Statute of Frauds would not hinder fraud on the court if the wrongdoer could testify that both parties agreed that the Statute would not apply.
Under Arizona's statute of frauds, "an agreement which by its terms is not to be performed during the lifetime of the promisor, or an agreement to devise or bequeath any property, or to make provision for any person by will," must be committed to writing and signed by the charged party.
The estate's more fundamental argument, however, was that the emails relied upon by Gutman did not constitute a writing that satisfied the statute of frauds.
Traynor first identified the policy underlying the California statute of frauds: "protecting estates being probated here from false claims based on alleged oral contracts to make wills." (95) But Traynor then noted that the legislature "has not spelled out the extent to which the statute of frauds is to apply to a contract having substantial contacts with another state" and this was not a purely domestic case.
The two chapters of Part I clearly and succinctly set out the distinctive history of English will-making and its place in the Church Courts, the Statute of Frauds, and an overview of reasons behind testamentary litigation ("uncontested" probates and issues of mental capacity and coercion tie for the lead).
The statute of frauds, in most states, makes it difficult if not impossible to enforce such an oral agreement.