medium · National Real Estate Exam
A landowner orally agrees to sell a parcel to a buyer for $200,000. The buyer pays the full price in cash, takes exclusive possession, and over the next year builds a $60,000 addition with the seller's knowledge. No written contract is ever signed. The seller then refuses to deliver a deed and asserts the Statute of Frauds. The buyer sues for specific performance.
What is the most likely result and the controlling rationale?
- The buyer obtains specific performance, because the combination of payment, possession, and valuable improvements constitutes part performance unequivocally referable to the oral contract, removing it from the Statute of Frauds
- The seller prevails, because the Statute of Frauds bars enforcement of any land-sale contract not evidenced by a signed writing, without exception for performance already rendered
- The buyer is limited to restitution of the $200,000 plus the improvement cost, because equity will compensate but will never compel conveyance of land on an oral promise
- The buyer obtains specific performance solely because full payment was made, since payment of the entire purchase price is by itself always sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More National Real Estate Exam practice
- A broker's employment contract with a seller is officially called the:
- What is the current status of the contract?
- A buyer defaults on a purchase agreement, and the seller chooses to keep the earnest money
- A buyer makes a written offer to a seller. Two days later, before the seller has responded
- A contract for the sale of a property is signed. Before closing, the property is destroyed
- A contract for the sale of real estate that has been signed by both parties is valid, but
- A contract that is valid and binding but allows one party to avoid the agreement because o
- A contract that is valid and enforceable until it is canceled by a party who was a victim