Randy sues Wally to enforce the original agreement. Wally argues that under the UCC Statute of Frauds, this agreement is unenforceable because it was never reduced to writing. Randy argues that:
1) Wally signed the order form; so the contract was in writing; and
2) In any case, the UCC Statute of Frauds was satisfied by performance when Randy sent over the watches.
In this case, the argument relies in The Statute of Frauds either by Satisfaction by Performance or Satisfaction by Writing. Wally argues that under the UCC Statute of Frauds, the agreement had to be in writing. He is correct. There must be a writing that is signed by the party against whom the contract is being enforced. However, Randy argues that the UCC Statute of Frauds was satisfied by performance when he sent the watches. He would also be correct, if he did in fact send all the watches. The law states that FULL performance is enough to satisfy the Statute of Frauds. Unfortunately, Randy only sent Wally half of the ordered goods, which means full performance was not completed.
Partial or Part Performance is never sufficient in a service contract case. Part performance makes the contract enforceable, but only to the extent of the part performance. Part performance can also invalidate a defense predicated upon the Statute of Frauds. It also only affects contracts for goods or for real estate. If a contract commissions the sale of personalized items from one party to another,…