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.
North Dakota Law Review
contract law, contracts, statute of frauds, UCC Section 2-201
Gregory Scott Crespi, Is a Signed Offer Sufficient to Satisfy the Statute of Frauds, 80 N.D. L. Rev. 1 (2004)