Statute of Frauds | Contracts | Defenses to Formation

This lesson covers the statute of frauds. Generally a contract does not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable. However, the statute of frauds requires that six categories of contracts (helpfully remembered by the acronym MYLEGS) must be in writing to be enforceable.
We follow a 3-step analysis: (1) Does the contract in question fall within one of the six categories covered by the statute of frauds?; (2) If so, is there a writing sufficient to satisfy the statute?; and (3) if there is no sufficient writing, is there an exception that will work to satisfy the statute instead?
Chapters
00:00 - Introduction
00:24 - Oral contracts generally okay
00:54 - Rationale for statute of frauds
02:42 - Overview of 3-step analysis
03:35 - Step 1: Category
17:35 - Step 2: Writing
19:04 - Common law writing requirements
24:02 - UCC Article 2 writing requirements
40:28 - Step 3: Exception
41:13 - Common law exceptions
46:14 - UCC exceptions
51:20 - Keeping the terminology straight
52:39 - Conclusion/Outro
The FREE flashcards to accompany this video can be found at docs.google.com/presentation/...

[@Sky-uz9se]

best video on statute of frauds hands down. Thanks!

[@cgasu0311]

excellent

[@terrilynnsmithrealty8021]

Excellent discussion.

[@theresan8880]

Ok, disregard. I think I get it. It’s a merchant’s confirmatory memo and that’s why it’s sufficient. And now I really want some chocolates. 😁

[@theresan8880]

I’m confused. At the 38:00 mark you’re talking about Sale of Goods and whether the writing is sufficient against the sender. Bob is the sender (of chocolates, right?). You said “if Barb was the defendant her writing confirming the transaction would be sufficient.” But she’s not the defendant, she’s the plaintiff in your example. Bob never signed. So how will Barb prevail?

[@headbangerministries]

Wow, thanks. I'm in the middle of a fraudulent inheritance buyout Contract against the trustee who made numerous strikes for a valid Contract. The trustee also says the other beneficiaries agreed and their names are not on the contract to agree. The contract has a notary public who states she was present during the signing and that insigned her journal with is false, there was just me amd some stranger. Nowhere nor was I ever told I had rights to rescind or allow changes. My brothers and I where not aware of these damages until 9.5 ueqrs later after becoming g aware the trustee is now wanting to sell the house and is making a buyout attempt to the other beneficiaries without any documentation. We have a court hearing today, Nov 15th at probate court. The trustee has also been stealing rental income and not distributed to beneficiaries.