Contract Law-Old Exam Question

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
ellewannabe
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:53 pm

Contract Law-Old Exam Question

Postby ellewannabe » Sat Dec 07, 2013 1:17 pm

Can anyone help with this? I'm stumped...

Under what circumstances, if any, should estoppel overcome the assertion of a statute of frauds defense? In answering the question, you might consider why many states continue to follow the approach of the First Restatement of Contracts rather than that of the Second Restatement.

Thanks!

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Contract Law-Old Exam Question

Postby sinfiery » Sat Dec 07, 2013 1:45 pm

Statute of frauds purpose is to prevent fraudulent claims of obligations arising from unprovable oral agreements. Check the context of the bargain (Too easy in employment law to allege something then rely upon it). Quantum Meruit/Equitable Estoppel will provide a potential remedy for any mistakes rendered if there is no promissory estoppel.

So I would allow PE to overcome the statute of frauds when the balancing test of quantum meruit does not provide enough of a remedy to the injured party whilst the risk of fraud in the specific case isn't likely to be extraordinarily high or easy to abuse


My teacher didn't really go over it but this was my general sense of the conflict

User avatar
PepperJack
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: Contract Law-Old Exam Question

Postby PepperJack » Sat Dec 07, 2013 2:13 pm

We didn't learn the restatement in my class LOL.

But this is going to be a back and forth about what's equitable. If one gives value, works on the property, etc.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests