Overview: statutes of frauds

Statutes of frauds, as the name might indicate, are statutes passed by state legislatures. And, there are no common law statutes of frauds -- indeed, the phrase "common law statutes" should sound like an oxymoron to you.

All of the states have on the books a set of statutes of frauds that provide a defense in certain circumstances when an agreement is not in writing. We have seen so far that promises do not need to be in writing in order to be enforceable. But certain types of contracts have been deemed by state legislatures to be more susceptible to "fraud," and for those contracts there must be something in writing in order to be enforceable. 

This defense thus requires statutory interpretation. To determine whether the defense applies, you must first ask whether there is a statute of frauds on point: this is often phrased as "does this agreement fall within a statute of frauds?" If the agreement does fall within one of the statutes of frauds, you have to determine whether the statute's requirements are satisfied. If they are satisfied, the contract is enforceable (and the defense fails). If they are not satisfied, the defense is successful (and the contract is not enforceable).

Each state has a different set of these statutes, each with their own requirements. We will cover here three illustrative statutes of frauds: (1) Minnesota's land sale/real property statute; (2) the UCC's statute; and (3) Colorado's "one-year" statute. Remember as you read these cases to focus on the language of the statute; determine what contracts "fall within" (or are covered by) the statute; and what the requirements of the statute are.