Bill Vs Doug
In the case of Bill Vs Doug, the decision is based on the fraud statute. The statute specifies contracts with specific characteristics to be done in writing, which is the basis of arguments raised by Bill. According to statute of fraud, transactions that involves the sale of property should be put in writing. Moreover the statute also requires contracts that involving transaction worth more than $500 to be put in writing. Bases on only these two provisions the contract between Bill and Doug is not enforceable. This is the argument presented by bill. The statute of fraud intends to protect the public against losing money in fraudulent contracts (Clarkson, Kenneth, Roger, & Frank).
However, statute of fraud gives exemptions for enforcement of a contract even if it does not fulfill the provisions provided by the statute of fraud. First exception which is applicable in this case is when one party has done part of the contract. According to statute of fraud, a contract is enforceable if one party has fulfilled part of the contract. Therefore, considering that Doug has settled part of the value of the house by paying a down payment of $50,000 and installment of $1,400 for four months making Doug’s total payment for the house $55,600. Considering exceptions provided by statute of fraud, this contract is enforceable under statute of fraud (Clarkson, Kenneth, Roger, & Frank).