Question

Edith Johnson owned a used Jayco brand pop-up camper that she inherited when her husband, Mark, passed away last year.  Edith advertised the pop-up camper for sale in a local newspaper for $5,000 or best offer.  Eric Young, seeing the ad and in the market for a camper, responded to the ad and met with Edith at her home to inspect the camper.

After some discussion, the Eric proposed to pay Edith $4,500 for the trailer, as-is, with a deposit of $500 in cash and the balance due on delivery the following week when Eric could come back with his 1 ton pick up to tow the camper home.  The two shook hands, and Edith wrote out a simple receipt for Eric’s deposit for the camper.

The following week, Eric did not appear and did not respond to Edith’s phone calls concerning the camper. Upset that Eric did not complete the transaction, Edith sold the camper to another buyer for $4,000.  Edith then called the attorney handling her late husband’s estate, and filed a district court action against Eric for receiving less than the agreed price, plus her incidental costs and attorney’s fees.  After receiving service, Eric filed a Notice of Intention to Defend, where he generally denied Edith’s complaint, and also raised the affirmative defense of the statute of frauds under UCC § 2-201.

Discuss whether section 2-201 excuses Eric’s performance under the contract.  Be sure to explain your answer by reference to the statute and the facts above.

Answer 1

PROVISIONS OF ArRTICLE 2 UCC -

Article 2 is a part of UCC that covers provisions regarding contract of sale of goods . Goods are defined as any type of moveble goods . This section is isapplicable to both merchants and non merchants.

Provisions of sec 2-201-

Sec 2-201 contains provisions regarding regarding fraud in contract that can be enforceable only when certain conditions get satisfied .

This section states that any contract for sale shall be enforceable for sale of good of worth more than 500 dollar .Further the contract for sales should be written and signed by party against whom enforcement is sought .

Futher the contract can be enforceable even without fulfillment of above conditions when the party against whom the contract is enforceable , admits in court .

CONCLUSION -

Here goods value are more than 500 dollars but is neither written nor signed by party against whom cantract is enforceable , however Edith had given a simple receipt but that receipt does not contain agreement of sale nor it is signed by Eric .

Further Eric did not admit acceptance regarding contract .

Thus 2-201 does not excuse Eric's performance under the contract .

NOTE- PLEASE DO UPVOTE IT WILL BE A GREAT FAVOUR . THANKS