Quick question regarding contracts that fall within the Statute of Frauds...

I have 2 conflicting sources of bar exam materials. One says that price is not required to be included as one of the essential terms... only "who" and "what" is required. The other one says unequivocally that price MUST be included in order to avoid a Statute of Frauds defense. Which is it? Thanks.

Depends if its UCC issues or Common Law. Let me do some digging for a more complete answer.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From:

What type of K, Common law or UCC?

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 4:11 PM, <

For UCC Ks, price terms not necessary if the parties intended that there be a K. Price terms may be reasonably supplied by the court.

For most common law Ks, price is an essential matter that must stated in the K. For example, if a K is for sale of land in fee simple, and does not contain price terms, it is unenforceable under the SOF.

Thank you, blistceleb.

I agree..
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From:

I should have been more clear in my question. I was referring to common law contracts. I've always thought price was an essential term, but when I read in a bar prep book that it ISN'T, my head started messing with me, as I'm slowly going insane from this whole process.

Thank you for your replies.

I've always heard that price was a required term in a contract for real estate, unless there's a term that specifies how the price will be determined, such as by appraisal, etc. The court needs to know what terms to enforce before it would make sense to have the contract by binding.