Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: restatement statute of frauds question  (Read 843 times)

Jake_MONDATTA

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
restatement statute of frauds question
« on: December 09, 2008, 12:51:21 PM »
In reviewing a practice exam, I came across my prof's answer in which he says that the statute of frauds no longer applies when one party fully performs.  Does anybody know where this exception is to be found in the restatement?  I could only find R 2d 145 which nixes the SOF when there is full performance by "all" parties.

Jake_MONDATTA

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
Re: restatement statute of frauds question
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2008, 01:03:50 PM »
Follow-up:  please note that I'm not talking about enforcing the contract under detrimental reliance or promissory estoppel (R 2d 139).  The answer specifically says that this would be an alternative to simply noting that one party has fully performed (while the other party has not performed at all).

Talk Is Cheap

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
  • F*** the man, I'm the man.
    • View Profile
Re: restatement statute of frauds question
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2008, 02:35:04 PM »
Hah, Contracts is over. I won't need my high school diploma, any more!