Sections 432.200 to 432.295 shall be known and also may be cited together the "Uniform digital Transactions Act".
You are watching: Missouri statute of frauds
(L. 2003 H.B. 254)
1.If a legislation requires that a record be retained, the requirement is satisfied by retaining an electronic record of the information in the record which:
(1)Accurately mirrors the information collection forth in the document after the was an initial generated in its final type as an electronic record or otherwise; and
(2)Remains obtainable for later reference.
2.A need to maintain a record in accordance with subsection 1 of this ar does not use to any information the sole purpose of i beg your pardon is to enable the document to it is in sent, communicated, or received.
3.A person may meet subsection 1 that this ar by utilizing the solutions of one more person if the demands of that subsection room satisfied.
4.If a regulation requires a document to be presented or preserved in its original form, or provides consequences if the document is not presented, or retained in its initial form, that law is satisfied by an electronic record preserved in accordance v subsection 1 that this section.
5.If a regulation requires retention that a check, that requirement is satisfied by retention of an electronic record the the details on the former and earlier of the check in accordance with subsection 1 that this section.
6.A record retained together an electronic record in accordance with subsection 1 the this section satisfies a law requiring a human being to retain a record for evidentiary, audit or choose purposes, unless a law enacted after respectable 28, 2003, specifically prohibits the use of an digital record because that the stated purpose.
7.This section does not preclude a governmental agency of this state indigenous specifying added requirements for the retention the a record subject to the agency's jurisdiction.
(L. 2003 H.B. 254)
432.045 - credit transaction agreements, characterized — action by debtor on specific credit agreements prohibited uneven in creating — materials of written statement need — oral modification permitted, when.
1.For the purposes of this section, the ax "credit agreement" means an agreement to loan or forbear repayment of money, come otherwise extend credit, or to make any other financial accommodation.
2.A debtor may not preserve an action upon or a defense come a credit covenant unless the credit covenant is in writing, gives for the payment of attention or for various other consideration, and also sets forth the appropriate terms and also conditions, except this subsection shall no preempt other details statutes that authorize extr protection for customer credit supplied in personal, family members or household purposes and also the constraints on credit agreements in subsection 3 the this section.
3.(1)If a created credit agreement has to be signed by a debtor, subsection 2 of this ar shall not apply to any credit agreement in between such debtor and also creditor unless such written credit agreement contains the complying with language in boldface ten suggest type:
"Oral agreements or commitments come loan money, expand credit or come forbear from enforcing repayment the a debt including promises to prolong or renew such debt room not enforceable.To protect you (borrower(s)) and us (creditor) indigenous misunderstanding or disappointment, any type of agreements us reach covering such matters are included in this writing, i m sorry is the complete and exclusive explain of the agreement in between us, other than as us may later agree in composing to modify it."
(2)The provisions the this ar shall not use to credit agreements for personal, family, or family members purposes once there is currently a composed contract administrate the transaction, and the debtor and creditor orally agree to defer one or an ext loan payment or make other credit covenant modifications and also such deferrals or modifications are limited in duration to not much more than ninety days.
4.Nothing included in this section shall influence the enforceability through a creditor of any type of promissory note, guaranty, defense agreement, deed that trust, mortgage, or other instrument, agreement, or file evidencing or developing an obligation for the payment that money or various other financial accommodation, lien, or defense interest.
(L. 1990 H.B. 1788, A.L. 1992 S.B. 688)
If a change or error in an electronic record occurs in a transmission between parties to a transaction, the following rules apply:
(1)If the parties have actually agreed to usage a security procedure to detect changes or errors and also one party has actually conformed to the procedure, but the other party has not, and also the nonconforming party would have detected the readjust or error had actually that party additionally conformed, the conforming party might avoid the effect of the readjusted or erroneous digital record;
(2)In an automatically transaction involving an individual, the individual may avoid the result of an digital record the resulted from an error made by the individual in taking care of the digital agent of one more person if the digital agent go not carry out an chance for the prevention or correction of the error and, at the time the separation, personal, instance learns of the error, the individual:
(a)Promptly educates the other human of the error and that the individual did no intend to be bound by the electronic record obtained by the other person;
(b)Takes reasonable steps, including steps that conform come the other person's reasonable instructions, to return to the other person or, if instructed by the other person, to damage the factor to consider received, if any, together a result of the erroneous digital record; and
(c)Has not used or received any type of benefit or worth from the consideration, if any, obtained from the other person;
(3)If neither subdivision (1) no one subdivision (2) the this ar applies, the change or error has the effect listed by various other law, consisting of the legislation of mistake, and the parties' contract, if any; and
(4)Subdivisions (2) and (3) that this section shall not be differed by agreement.
(L. 2003 H.B. 254)
No activity shall be carried to charge any executor or administrator, upon any kind of special promise to answer for any type of debt or loss out of his very own estate, or come charge any person upon any special promise come answer for the debt, default or legacy of an additional person, or to charge any kind of person upon any agreement made in factor to consider of marriage, or upon any kind of contract made for the sale of lands, tenements, hereditaments, or an attention in or worrying them, or any lease thereof, for a longer time than one year, or upon any kind of agreement that is not to it is in performed within one year indigenous the making thereof, unless the agreement upon i beg your pardon the activity shall it is in brought, or some memorandum or keep in mind thereof, shall be in writing and signed by the party come be charged therewith, or some other human by that thereto legitimate authorized, and no contract because that the sale of lands make by an certified dealer shall be binding top top the principal, unless such agent is authorized in composing to make stated contract.
(RSMo 1939 § 3354)
Prior revisions: 1929 § 2967; 1919 § 2169; 1909 § 2783
Actions top top contract barred, revitalized by written promise, 516.320
Marriage contracts affecting building to it is in in writing, acknowledged, 451.220
Powers of lawyer to convey genuine estate, how acknowledged and proved, 442.360
Agreements not to be Performed in Year
(1961) Plaintiff might not recuperate in action for breach of oral contract for personal employment due to the fact that if employment to be to be because that one year and also to commence thirty-seven work after agreement was make it come within the state of frauds and if employment was for one indefinite period then it was terminable in ~ will and fact that in dependence on agreement plaintiff had quit his task would not estop defendant indigenous denying the contract.Morsinkhoff v. Luxurious Laundry & dried Cleaning Co. (A.), 344 S.W.2d 639.
(1973) hosted lease forced to it is in in composing by state of frauds may be rescinded by subsequent oral commitment where unexpired term of lease is much less than that duration required through the state for created agreements.Gee v. Nieberg (A.), 501 S.W.2d 542.
(1974) hosted that because contract might have to be performed within a year the was not barred by statute of frauds. Want v. Century supply Co. (A.), 508 S.W.2d 515.
Contracts entailing Lands
(1961) summary of actual estate in writing as "Vo's bldg" held insufficient under statute.Macy v. Day (A.), 346 S.W.2d 555.
(1961) Where covenant to go into into a lease was partly in writing but omitted a an excellent many problem which were alleged to be in an oral part of the commitment it was not enforceable under the frauds.Frostwood Drugs, Inc. V. Fisher & Frichtel building Co. (Mo.), 352 S.W.2d 694
(1962) Plaintiff, buyer, might not recover in action for damages for breach that alleged contract come convey realty versus husband and also wife, who hosted the realty together tenants through the entireties, where just the husband had actually signed the contract and there was no memorandum in composing signed by wife authorizing husband to act together her certified dealer or ratifying his actions.Austin & base Builders, Inc. V. Lewis (Mo.), 359 S.W.2d 711.
(1962) Where 5 year lease consisted of option provision by which lessee could continue as tenant under very same terms and also conditions for another five year the rental to it is in mutually determined by the next at time of exercise of option, amount of rent to be charged to be essential part of the contract and also oral commitment thereon was unenforceable and also fact that lessee continued to be in possession because that 8 months and paid rent at same rate as previously paid under lease did no exclude choice clause from statute of frauds.Rosenberg v. Gas business Co. (A.), 363S.W.2d 20.
(1967) just payment that money together partial performance will not take land revenue contract the end of state of frauds.Agreement no to challenge will which was fulfilled was sufficient performance to take oral commitment to convey land out of the statute. Alonzo v Laubert (Mo.), 418 S.W.2d 94.
(1968) The state of frauds uses with equal force to both the purchasers and also sellers of actual estate.McQueen v. Huelsing (A.), 425 S.W.2d 506.
(1971) whereby written contract in evidence explained the property in inquiry as 80 acres more or less, gave vendors' name, residence, verified the contract concerned dairy farm, and vendors lived on subject farm and owned no other real estate, and also contract executed with all parties present on the topic farm agreeing that exact legal description could be supplied later on by genuine estate agent, the contract was enough under state of frauds for objectives of reformation and particular performance. Deulen v. Wilkinson (Mo.), 473 S.W.2d 357.
(1987) though this section requires that a contract for the revenue of real home be evidenced by a writing, that does not require that a rescission of such contract, if together contract is however executory, be diminished to a writing.Smith v. Mohan, 723 S.W.2d 94 (Mo.App. E.D.).
(1960) evidence held adequate to display the component performance of dental contract for the sale of floor so as to take it the end of the state of frauds. Anderson v. Abernathy (Mo.), 339 S.W.2d 817.
(1963) No creating or memorandum is required where the promise to i think the debts of an additional is made come the debtor himself and not come the creditor.Hafford v. Smith (A.), 369 S.W.2d 290.
(1973) whereby the leading and main thing of defendant's promise come plaintiffs the he would see that they were paid remained in his very own interest, the promise was not within the statute of frauds. Carvitto v. Ryle (A.), 495 S.W.2d 109.
(1974) Memorandum is sufficient to remove impediment of state of frauds if it sets out essential terms of agreement.Bayless structure Materials Co. V. Peerless floor Co. (A.), 509 S.W.2d 206.
(1986) A promise require not be decreased to writing under the provisions that this section dealing with promises come answer for the responsibility of an additional person, if main purpose of such promise is to serve the understand of the promisor quite than such various other person.Baron v. Lerman, 719 S.W.2d 72 (Mo.App. E.D.).
(1987) it is enough to plead full performance of an oral contract to stop a motion to i have dissolved under this section.Irwin v. Berrelsmeyer, 730 S.W.2d 302 (Mo.App. E.D.).
(1960) A parol lease for five years and also parol commitment to do the lease to be within the statute of frauds and also fact that lessor make improvements throughout the first year conditioned upon the lease did not amount to performance that would take the agreement out of the state of frauds. Newkirk v. Moley (A.), 343 S.W.2d 213.
(1964) removal of buildings from leased tract by lessors was as referable to written mining lease regarding alleged new verbal agreement and lessor's conduct through respect to roads and ditches cut by lessees to be nonaction rather than performance and not inconsistent with written lease, and also therefore, alleged oral covenant was no taken the end of the state of frauds on soil of performance by lessors.Zink v. Pittsburg & Midway coal Mining Co. (A.), 374 S.W.2d 158.
(1964) In suit for specific performance of an alleged parol agreement between husband and wife to store their currently mutual and reciprocal critical wills and testaments in force and also not revoke them hosted that there was not part performance on component of wife adequate to remove the alleged parol covenant from the operation of the statute of frauds. Rookstool v. Neaf (Mo.), 377 S.W.2d 402.
(1968) Anticipatory, preparatory, collateral, and ancillary plot performed in reliance on a verbal contract, usually are not sufficient part performance to contact for an exemption to the provisions the the state of frauds; but if the verbal covenant is sufficiently established, the acts are done v the understanding of the other party, and if the transforms in circumstances resulting from such acts are of such nature the the consequences thereof are, or may be, disastrous, the court might enforce the contract, also though the acts room not, strict speaking, in execution the the contract.Pointer v. Ward (Mo.), 429 S.W.2d 269.
(1986) A promise require not be diminished to writing under the provisions of this section handling promises come answer for the obligation of another person, if key purpose of such promise is to serve the understanding of the promisor rather than such other person. Baron v. Lerman, 719 S.W.2d 72 (Mo.App.).
(1987) the is adequate to plead full performance that an oral contract to prevent a activity to dismiss under this section. Irwin v. Berrelsmeyer, 730 S.W.2d 302 (Mo.App.).
See more: Best Sleepers Fantasy Football 2015, 2015 Fantasy Football: Running Back Sleepers
(1987) despite this section needs that a contract for the revenue of real home be shown by a writing, that does not call for that a rescission of together contract, if such contract is yet executory, be decreased to a writing. Smith v. Mohan, 723 S.W.2d 94 (Mo.App.).