Scenario: Tom owned a house set on 1 acre of land that he wanted to sell when he

Question

Scenario: Tom owned a house set on 1 acre of land that he wanted to sell when he retired in April, 2013. On April 1, 2012, Mary and Tom orally agreed that Mary would purchase Tom's house and 1 acre of land for $350,000 cash on April 15, 2013. In the meantime, Mary and Tom agreed that Tom would continue to own and live on the property. On April 15, 2013, Mary presented Tom with a cashier's check for $350,000 for the house and Tom transferred the deed to the house and land to Mary in her name. Mary and Tom properly filed all the documents necessary for the closing on the real estate sale. Mary and Tom had also agreed previously that Tom could remain on the property following the closing of the sale on April 15, 2013 until April 17, 2013 to give him time to move out. On April 17, Tom refused to move out claiming that their oral agreement for sale of the property was invalid and unenforceable under the Statue of Frauds.

1. Was the sale originally subject to the Statute of Frauds and if so, for what reason(s) and why?

2. Is the contract for sale of the property valid so that Tom has to relinquish possession of the property? Why or why not?

Explanation / Answer

1. statue of fraud represents the viable legal actions against the person who commits fraud, it includes kinds of contracts be memorialized in a writing, signed by the party to be charged, with sufficient content to evidence the contract. here the oral agreement should be treated as agreement with fully law protected only.

2. yes, it is valid. that is the reason only he paid a check worth of the money and the owner signed by transferring the property on the other party name.if it is not valid he may not do it

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse S
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.