|
|
Article: Promoting or frustrating the statute of frauds? Implications from Holman v. Childersburg Bancorporation, Inc.(Alabama)
- Article from:
- Jones Law Review
- Article date:
- January 1, 2004
- Author:
CopyrightCOPYRIGHT 2004 Thomas Goode Jones School of Law. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information)
|
INTRODUCTION
In Alabama, a transfer of interest in real property must be in writing, signed by the party charged, and contain a recital of consideration or it is void by the Statute of Frauds. (1) However, the Alabama Supreme Court has held that partial performance of an oral agreement involving real property operates as an exception to remove the oral agreement from the Statute of Frauds. (2) Thus, an otherwise void oral agreement is removed from the Statute of Frauds when payment is made in full or in part, or when the purchaser is put in possession of the land by the seller, or when fraud is shown from the inception of the oral agreement. (3) In a recent ...