Question

Fred verbally agreed to purchase a 3 acre parcel of land from Greta. Fred wrote up the following: "I, Fred Smith, agree to buy from Gretta Brown Lot 6 of Plan 12698, being a 3 acre parcel of land for the price of $800,000.00. Deposit of $100.00 is provided at this time. The sale is to be completed by July 6, 2022." Fred signed the memorandum, Gretta did not. Fred had the intention of reselling the land to Harold, who would pay $1,000,000.00 for the land if blueberries were planted on it. Three weeks prior to July 6, 2022, but after the writing of the agreement, Fred commenced to plant blueberries and he completed the planting by July 6, 2022 at a cost of $100,000.00. When he went to complete the transaction, Gretta refused, saying she felt the contract was void. She then sold the land to someone else for a higher price and completed the sale. Fred sued Gretta. Would he be successful?

Answer 1

Fred's chance of success in his lawsuit relies on the Statute of Frauds, possible part performance exception, and principles like promissory estoppel. His written memo and actions taken by planting blueberries, along with the associated significant costs, may support his case.

Step-by-step explanation:

Whether Fred would be successful in his lawsuit against Greta for refusing to complete the sale of land depends substantially on the concept of the Statute of Frauds and part performance exception. Under the Statute of Frauds, contracts for the sale of land must be in writing to be enforceable.

Fred's memorandum of the sale could potentially satisfy this requirement if it contains all of the essential terms and is signed by the party to be charged, which in this case is Greta who did not sign. However, courts may enforce a verbal contract if a party has taken significant steps in part performance of the contract that indicates the contract did indeed exist.

Fred planting blueberries and incurring significant costs could be seen as a compliable part performance action. Additionally, depending on jurisdiction, equitable principles such as promissory estoppel may also apply if Fred reasonably relied on Greta's promise to his detriment. Legal advice from a qualified attorney familiar with local real estate and contract law is crucial in such scenarios.