Enforceable contract and Statute of Frauds

 

Jason Novell, doing business as Novell Associates, hired
Barbara Meade as an independent contractor. The parties
orally agreed on the terms of employment, including payment of a share of the company’s income to Meade, but they
did not put anything in writing. Two years later, Meade quit.
Novell then told Meade that she was entitled to $9,602—
25 percent of the difference between the accounts receivable
and the accounts payable as of Meade’s last day of work. Meade
disagreed and demanded more than $63,500—25 percent of
the revenue from all invoices, less the cost of materials and
outside processing, for each of the years that she had worked
for Novell. Meade filed a lawsuit against Novell for breach of
contract. (See The Writing Requirement.)
1. The first group will evaluate whether the parties had an
enforceable contract.
2. The second group will decide whether the parties’ oral agreement falls within any exception to the Statute of Frauds.
3. The third group will discuss how the lawsuit would be
affected if Novell admitted that the parties had an oral contract under which Meade was entitled to 25 percent of the
difference between the accounts receivable and payable as
of the day Meade quit.