UCC Statute of Frauds
Explain, in 3-5 paragraphs, relying solely on the and the materials about the Statute of Frauds
Wally and Randy discuss terms on the phone for a while. Eventually, Wally offers to purchase 100 watches for a total price of $2,500. Randy replies “Okay, you’ve got yourself a deal. Listen, I’m going to send you an order form to sign. Send it back to me, and I’ll ship the watches.”
Randy then faxes Wally a form which says: “I, Wally, agree to purchase Rolek watches from Randy for $25 per watch.” Wally signs the form and mails it back to Randy. Randy receives the signed form two days later.
The following week, Randy sends Wally a package with 50 watches and a note that says:
“Hi Wally: Here are 50 of the watches we discussed last week. I’ll have the remaining 50 to you within a few days. In the meantime, I’m enclosing my bill. [signed] Randy”
Enclosed in the package is a bill for $2,500 for 100 watches. Unfortunately, Wally by this time had changed his mind about buying the watches, as he figures that he’d rather sell Rolexes. He therefore calls up Randy and says:
“Listen, Randy, I’m sorry, but I changed my mind about the whole business. I’ll send you back your watches and I’ll even reimburse your shipping expenses, but I can’t pay for the watches.”
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.
Who is correct? Explain, in 3-5 paragraphs, relying solely on the UCC Statute of Frauds and the materials about the Statute of Frauds you learned during your NPC Contracts course. Case law is not necessary for this assignment. An IRAC-based essay is also not necessary.