statute of frauds bar (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

statute of frauds bar in New Jersey

6 New Jersey opinions name it 3 courts 1960–2026 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Beverly Maeker v. William Ross (072185)green
nj · 2014 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026See Maeker v. Ross, 219 N.J. 565, 578 (2014).

11
First Valley Leasing, Inc. v. Goushygreen
njd · 1992 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
1 sentence

1999The UCC "prohibits a party from invoking the Statute of Frauds defense if that party has received and accepted payment." First Valley Leasing, Inc. v. Goushy, 795 F.Supp. 693, 696 (D.N.J.1992); see also Buffaloe v. Hart, 114 N.C.App. 52 , 441 S.E. 2d 172, 176 (N.C.Ct.App.1994) (acceptance of check presents a question of fact).

11
Buffaloe v. Hartgreen
ncctapp · 1994 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999The UCC "prohibits a party from invoking the Statute of Frauds defense if that party has received and accepted payment." First Valley Leasing, Inc. v. Goushy, 795 F.Supp. 693, 696 (D.N.J.1992); see also Buffaloe v. Hart, 114 N.C.App. 52 , 441 S.E. 2d 172, 176 (N.C.Ct.App.1994) (acceptance of check presents a question of fact).

1999The UCC "prohibits a party from invoking the Statute of Frauds defense if that party has received and accepted payment." First Valley Leasing, Inc. v. Goushy, 795 F.Supp. 693, 696 (D.N.J.1992); see also Buffaloe v. Hart, 114 N.C.App. 52 , 441 S.E. 2d 172, 176 (N.C.Ct.App.1994) (acceptance of check presents a question of fact).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Feldman v. Warshawsky green
nj · 1938
2 sentences

2005While a simple transfer of mortgage money from respondent to his wife’s parents would not suffice to remove the agreement from the statute of frauds requirement, Feldman v. Warshawsky, 125 N.J.

2005Eq. 19, 20 , 4 A.2d 84 (E. & A.1938), payment of rents and an expenditure of $6,000 for interior renovations has been held to be sufficient reliance to establish an oral six-year lease.

12005–2005
WILLOW BROOK RECR. CENTER, INC. v. Selle green
njsuperctappdiv · 1967
2 sentences

1997The last mention of the issue appears to be in Willow Brook Recreation Center, Inc. v. Selle, 96 N.J.Super. 358 , 233 A.2d 77 (App.Div.1967), certif. den. 51 N.J. 187 , 238 A.2d 473 where this court took note of the principle “... that oral agreements extending the time for performance of contracts within the Statute of Frauds are valid.” Id. at 364, 233 A.2d 77 .

1997The last mention of the issue appears to be in Willow Brook Recreation Center, Inc. v. Selle, 96 N.J.Super. 358 , 233 A.2d 77 (App.Div.1967), certif. den. 51 N.J. 187 , 238 A.2d 473 where this court took note of the principle “... that oral agreements extending the time for performance of contracts within the Statute of Frauds are valid.” Id. at 364, 233 A.2d 77 .

11997–1997
Willow Brook Recreation Center, Inc. v. Selle green
nj · 1968
2 sentences

1997The last mention of the issue appears to be in Willow Brook Recreation Center, Inc. v. Selle, 96 N.J.Super. 358 , 233 A.2d 77 (App.Div.1967), certif. den. 51 N.J. 187 , 238 A.2d 473 where this court took note of the principle “... that oral agreements extending the time for performance of contracts within the Statute of Frauds are valid.” Id. at 364, 233 A.2d 77 .

1997The last mention of the issue appears to be in Willow Brook Recreation Center, Inc. v. Selle, 96 N.J.Super. 358 , 233 A.2d 77 (App.Div.1967), certif. den. 51 N.J. 187 , 238 A.2d 473 where this court took note of the principle “... that oral agreements extending the time for performance of contracts within the Statute of Frauds are valid.” Id. at 364, 233 A.2d 77 .

11997–1997
Eiseman v. Schneider green
nj · 1897
1 sentence

1978Deevy v. Porter, 11 N.J. 594 (1953); Eiseman v. Schneider, supra .

11978–1978
Deevy v. Porter green
nj · 1953
1 sentence

1978Deevy v. Porter, 11 N.J. 594 (1953); Eiseman v. Schneider, supra .

11978–1978
Irvmor Corp. v. Rodewald green
ny · 1930
2 sentences

1960Irvmor Corp. v. Rodewald, 253 N. Y. 472, 171 N. E. 747 , 70 A. L.

1960Irvmor Corp. v. Rodewald, 253 N. Y. 472, 171 N. E. 747 , 70 A. L.

11960–1960

Where else courts name it

NY 80 (1922–2025) TX 69 (1929–2026) CA 39 (1910–2025) OH 19 (1992–2026) IN 18 (1835–2025) IL 16 (1986–2024) MI 15 (1969–2025) MO 15 (1977–2021) AL 15 (1985–2015) MA 13 (1994–2015) FL 12 (1987–2012) PA 12 (1982–2026) CO 11 (1978–2014) WA 11 (1965–2023) GA 10 (1980–2025) UT 10 (1983–2024) NC 10 (1979–2024) WY 9 (1953–2017) IA 9 (1959–2014) CT 9 (1984–2002) ND 8 (1978–2023) MT 8 (1969–2016) AZ 7 (1977–2024) MN 7 (1976–2016) NM 7 (1972–2026) ME 7 (1910–2019) MD 6 (1967–2012) SD 6 (1984–2026) NJ 6 (1960–2026) TN 6 (1988–2021) WI 6 (1881–2024) ID 6 (1990–2025) OR 5 (1972–2010) DC 4 (1980–2014) NE 3 (2006–2021) VT 3 (1979–2024) WV 3 (1925–2021) AR 3 (1988–2025) MS 3 (1979–2005) VA 3 (2000–2013) DE 2 (2018–2021) VI 2 (2001–2017) HI 2 (1995–2002) KS 2 (1924–2025)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check