If a contract contains valid terms but lacks the required writing under the Statute of Frauds, what is its status?

If a contract contains valid terms but lacks the required writing under the Statute of Frauds, what is its status?

• A. Unenforceable
• B. Void
• C. Voidable
• D. Valid

Answer: (A)

Lacking the required writing under the Statute of Frauds means the contract cannot be enforced in court, even though the terms themselves are valid. The writing requirement is what makes it enforceable; without it, there’s no basis for a court to compel performance or award damages. It isn’t void or voidable—there’s nothing illegal or defective about how the agreement was formed—it's simply not enforceable due to the missing writing. In some situations, exceptions like partial performance, admissions, or promissory estoppel can affect enforceability, but the default status given the missing writing is unenforceable.

Lacking the required writing under the Statute of Frauds means the contract cannot be enforced in court, even though the terms themselves are valid. The writing requirement is what makes it enforceable; without it, there’s no basis for a court to compel performance or award damages. It isn’t void or voidable—there’s nothing illegal or defective about how the agreement was formed—it's simply not enforceable due to the missing writing. In some situations, exceptions like partial performance, admissions, or promissory estoppel can affect enforceability, but the default status given the missing writing is unenforceable.