Contracts of dispute often raise the need to understand specific aspects of the statute of frauds. This majorly raises the issue of whether the contract was in written form or not. In the lawsuit accusing the Atlanta businessmen of fraud, failure to put their agreement in writing is problematic as it raises the possibility of fraud. Quilter’s Annie Mae Young accuses Atlanta art scholar, William Arnett of cheating her finically and falsely representing the proceeds from the enterprise linked with her quilts. The defendant, William Arnet may use the statute of fraud as a defense thus weakening the accusers cheating claim. Often the statutes of fraud usually require a written and signed document for engagements and agreements such as prenuptial agreements, marriage contracts, and contracts transferring rights of land, agreements for goods and agreement by an executor to pay out a given debt. According to the statutes of fraud contracts for the sale of goods valued above $ 500 must be made in writing in order to be enforceable. From the plaintiff’s claim, it is understandable that this is the main statute of fraud that will apply in this case.
The statute of fraud will no doubt become an issue and will entail a bigger part of the accusation and defense. This will prove very problematic for both parties in the case. In some situations, the statute of fraud may not be available in the case there was a partial performance. However, in some instances, good faith (which may lack in this particular case involving the Atlanta businessman and Quilter Annie Mae Young) by either of the party may lead to one party taking liability irrespective of whether there was a written agreement or not. However, an agreement may be enforced despite the fact that it may not conform to the statute of fraud further compounding the case for both parties. In some cases, the jurisdiction may take note of the promissory estoppel in the case the statute of fraud has led one of the parties to depend on the unwritten and enforceable agreement. In accordance to contract law, promissory estoppel denotes to the principle that one of the parties may gain on the assumption of an oral promise undertaken relying on the assurance that the harmed party was only trying to recover based on the promise.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The above issues often complicate contracts or verbal promises as in the case of Quilter Annie Mae Young and the Atlanta businessmen. Both parties did not put into consideration the above issues thus their agreement was not clear. Failure to observe the above issues often makes a contract case very difficult and complicated. For example, according to the statutes of fraud contracts for the sale of products above $500 must be made in writing to make it enforceable. Thus, failure to document this agreement was the first mistake. However, according to the plaintiff, she was cheated financially by her corporate clients and promoters. Whether the plaintiff’s accusation is in order is another case since she willingly agreed to the agreement without having sufficient knowledge of the entire contract. Lack of the details of the contract will also raise complications for the case and may be problematic in determining who holds the highest liability between the plaintiff and the defendant.
