A buyer and seller agreed orally for the sale of a parcel of land for $200,000. The buyer paid $50,000 as a down payment and took possession of the land, where they began constructing a small storage unit. Before the transaction was completed, the seller repudiated and refused to transfer the title. The buyer sues to enforce the oral agreement. Which of the following is the BEST basis for the court to enforce the agreement?
The equitable principle that verbal agreements are enforceable when they are made in good faith.
The payment of a portion of the purchase price demonstrates reliance on the contract.
The oral agreement is enforceable since the value of the land exceeded the threshold for oral agreements under the Uniform Commercial Code.
The buyer's part performance, demonstrated by a down payment, taking possession, and making improvements to the land.
The statute of frauds generally requires that contracts for the sale of land be in writing to be enforceable. However, the part performance doctrine is an exception where an oral agreement for the sale of land is enforceable if the party seeking enforcement can show certain acts, such as payment, taking possession, or making improvements on the land, that unequivocally indicate the existence of a land sale agreement. In this case, the buyer's payment, possession, and construction work collectively satisfy the part performance exception and provide a clear indication of the agreement. Other answers misstate or misapply legal principles. Reliance on a mere payment or unclear intentions to rely are insufficient under the statute of frauds.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is the part performance doctrine in contract law?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the Statute of Frauds?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why are oral agreements for the sale of land typically not enforceable?