Every first-year law student learns that the Statute of Frauds is a defense to certain oral contracts. When a plaintiff brings a breach of contract claim based on an oral agreement, the Statute of Frauds will often defeat it. But what if a plaintiff brings a quasi-contractual claim based on an arrangement or course of conduct between the parties, or a claim for promissory estoppel?
New York courts have consistently held that a plaintiff may not “circumvent” the Statute of Frauds through artful pleading of a quasi-contractual “arrangement” instead of asserting breach of an oral contract. But in practice, claims for unjust enrichment, quantum meruit, and promissory estoppel often succeed where a claim for breach of an oral contract fails, overcoming a Statute of Frauds defense.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]