Blaw Chapter 15

The parol evidence rule is an exclusionary rule of evidence.

The parol evidence rule only applies to written contracts.

The word “parol” literally means release.

The parol evidence rule would allow evidence to be introduced to explain what the parties meant by the term “serrated.”

The parol evidence rule prohibits introduction of all evidence that would result in modifying written contracts.

The statute of frauds has to do with fraud in the inducement of a contract.

Most types of contracts are valid without being written.

The statute of frauds generally requires that both parties sign the writing.

A collateral promise is an undertaking to be primarily liable for the principal debtor’s debt.

Jim promises to marry Cynda if Cynda will buy him a new Ferrari for his birthday. This promise must be in writing to be enforceable.

A part performance exception to the statute of frauds in many states requires both that the transferee has paid at least a portion of the purchase price and has either taken possession of the real estate or has started to make valuable improvements on it.

A usage of trade is a practice or method of dealing, regularly observed and followed in a place, vocation, or trade.

In an employment agreement with Karl, Arnold promises to work for Karl for the rest of his life. This promise must be in writing to be enforceable.

Clara types a letter to David setting forth the terms of a contract between the two of them that falls within the statute of frauds. At the end of the letter, she types her name but does not sign her signature to it. If David wants to use the letter to satisfy the writing requirement, he may do so.

A contract to pay for lawn care services costing $1,500 would have to be in writing to be enforceable.

Under the Code an oral contract for specially manufactured goods costing $500 is enforceable even if the seller has not begun their manufacture.

The UCC requires that all contracts for the sale of goods must be in writing.

Most courts consider a merger clause to be conclusive proof of an integrated contract.

In order to be sufficient, an agreement required to be written under the statute of frauds must be signed at the bottom and notarized.

Bob sends Fred a letter offering to sell Fred his car for $2,500. Fred writes back that he’ll take it. They now must get together and write a memorandum because it is a sale of goods for over $500.

The statute of frauds does not prevent the performance of oral contracts if the parties are willing to perform.

The parol evidence rule applies to partially written agreements.

When a court interprets an ambiguous contract, usage of the trade will take precedence over express terms in the contract.

To satisfy the statute of frauds, the person who wants to bring the lawsuit must sign a memorandum.

On March 20, Gordon orally agrees to work for Carrham, Inc. for a period of one year commencing on June 1. No writing is necessary here, because the contract can be performed within one year.

The parol evidence rule applies only to integrated contracts, meaning those in which the parties have assented to the written agreement as the statement of the complete agreement between them.

The parol evidence rule does not prevent the use of evidence that a party would like to use to establish the defense of fraud, duress, or undue influence.

In interpreting a contract, terms which have been separately negotiated are given priority over standardized, pre-printed terms.

The English statute of frauds and the Code’s provision differ in language but have the same basic legal effect: an oral contract for certain identified situations is void.

In order to induce a car dealer to sell her son a car on credit, Mary promises that she will pay for the son’s car if the son defaults on his monthly payments to the dealership. Mary’s promise must be in writing or have a sufficient electronic record.

An example of language creating a suretyship as meant under the statute of frauds would be the following: “If my business partner does not write out the check for the supply bill for our company, I will.”

Tom’s bank is threatening to repossess his car. Tom’s mother promises the bank to pay Tom’s obligation if Tom defaults. This promise must be in writing (or have a sufficient electronic record) to be enforceable.

ABC Corp. is building a new office tower. Ace Plumbing Supplies refuses to provide plumbing materials on credit to the plumbing subcontractor on the building. ABC promises Ace that it will pay for the materials if the subcontractor does not. ABC’s promise is unenforceable unless in writing.

Although a contract to purchase an undeveloped lot must be in writing to be enforceable, a contract to run power lines over someone else’s lot need not be.

The test under the one-year provision of the statute of frauds is based on the likelihood that the contract will be completed within one year.

The test under the one-year provision of the statute of frauds is whether the terms of the contract make it possible for performance to occur within one year.

A party to a contract that is unenforceable because of the statute of frauds may be able to recover in restitution.

The UCC permits an oral agreement for the sale of goods to be enforced against a party who admits to the contract in court, even though the statute of frauds requires the agreement to be in writing.

The suretyship provision rule within the statute of frauds applies to cases involving one party’s promising to perform the duty of another party to yet a third party.

The main purpose doctrine is an exception developed by the courts to the suretyship provision.

The suretyship provision has been interpreted to include promises made to a debtor.

The executor-administrator provision applies to promises of an executor of a decedent’s will to the decedent’s creditors.

The statute of frauds requires all contracts that can be fully performed within one year of their making to be in writing or proper electronic form.

The UETA has been adopted by all of the states to give full effect to emergency transactions.

The computation of time for the one-year provision of the statute of frauds starts when the agreement is made, not when the performance is to begin.