The rule that certain contracts must be in writing to be enforceable.
The statute of frauds is a long-standing rule, adopted in some form by every state, requiring particular categories of contract to be evidenced by a signed writing. An oral agreement in one of those categories can be unenforceable even though both sides plainly intended it and one has already begun performing.
“No action shall be brought upon any agreement that is not to be performed within one year unless the agreement is in writing and signed by the party to be charged.”
Before you sign, Main AI reads the actual contract and flags where a clause like this shifts risk onto you — in plain language, tied to the exact wording.
Analyze my document free →The recurring categories are: sales of land or interests in land, agreements that by their terms cannot be performed within one year, promises to answer for another person’s debt, contracts made in consideration of marriage, and sales of goods above a dollar threshold set by each state’s commercial code. The writing does not have to be a formal contract — a signed memo, an exchange of emails, or a set of texts containing the essential terms can satisfy it. Courts also recognise exceptions, including part performance and reliance.
See this in your own document: run a free analysis — findings quote the exact language.
“This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties and may not be amended except by a writing signed by both parties.”
The mirror image of this rule appears in most contracts as a no-oral-modification clause. If a contract says amendments must be written and signed, a verbal side agreement or a manager’s promise may not bind anyone — which is why getting a change confirmed in an email, even an informal one, is worth the thirty seconds.