This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Buffaloe v. Hart: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
|issues=May a contract that falls under the Statute of Frauds be enforceable if a party (Buffaloe) has partially performed (paid the 1st $5,000) the contract? | |issues=May a contract that falls under the Statute of Frauds be enforceable if a party (Buffaloe) has partially performed (paid the 1st $5,000) the contract? | ||
|holding=Yes. A contract that falls under the Statute of Frauds may be enforceable if a party has partially performed the contract. | |holding=Yes. A contract that falls under the Statute of Frauds may be enforceable if a party has partially performed the contract. | ||
|rule=[[Contracts/Statute of frauds|Partial-performance exception]] to the statute of frauds | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/buffaloe-v-hart | |link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/buffaloe-v-hart | ||
Revision as of 13:53, July 7, 2023
| Buffaloe v. Hart | |
| Court | Court of Appeals of North Carolina |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | March 1, 1994 |
Facts
Mr. Buffaloe was a tobacco farmer who rented 5 barns from the Hart couple.
The 2 parties, Buffaloe & Hart, had a handshake agreement without a written contract.
Buffaloe began negotiations to purchase the barns. He proposed & paid the 1st of 4 installments of $5,000 to purchase the barns (for a total of $20,000).
Bufalloe applied for a loan to pay the remaining $15,000. The bank didn't approve the loans. Nevertheless, he entered into an agreement to sell 3 of the 5 barns to 3rd parties & informed Hart.
The following day, Hart informed Buffaloe that the barns had been sold & returned Buffaloe's check.Procedural History
Buffaloe sued the Harts for breach of contract in state court.
The Harts answered that there wasn't a breach of contract based on the statute of frauds.
The jury decides in favor of Buffaloe.
