Is a Signed Offer Sufficient to Satisfy the Statute of Frauds?

10 Pages Posted: 27 Oct 2016 Last revised: 24 Feb 2017

See all articles by Gregory S. Crespi

Gregory S. Crespi

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law

Date Written: 2004

Abstract

In this article, the author attempts to clarify the law on the issue of whether a signed offer is a “sufficient writing" to satisfy the statute of frauds requirement. The article seeks to demonstrate that much of the confusion among contract law treatises regarding this issue stems from the writers sometimes failing to distinguish clearly between "common law" state statutes of frauds and UCC Section 2-201. Given the large body of case law in support of allowing signed offers to satisfy the common law statute of frauds requirements, the author argues that courts should be more reluctant to interpret UCC Section 2-201 to hold signed offers insufficient. The author also offers another reasonable interpretation for Section 2-201 that would better reflect the intent of the drafters of the UCC.

Keywords: contract law, contracts, statute of frauds, UCC Section 2-201

Suggested Citation

Crespi, Gregory S., Is a Signed Offer Sufficient to Satisfy the Statute of Frauds? (2004). North Dakota Law Review, Vol. 80, No. 1, 2004, SMU Dedman School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 332, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2859605

Gregory S. Crespi (Contact Author)

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 750116
Dallas, TX 75275
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
20
Abstract Views
296
PlumX Metrics