This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: c signatures satisfied the statute, but it had noted that other states
had relaxed the signature requirement considerably to accommodate various forms of electronic communication. California law also provided that typed names at the end of telegrams were adequate as
signatures. The court concluded that there was no meaningful difference between telegrams and an
e-mail, and found that the Bucher signature could satisfy the statute of frauds requirements. The court
remanded the case for trial on the remaining questions of fact.
Holding: The contract is clearly within the statute of frauds, and thus a writing is required. The fax could
legally meet the requirements.
Questions for Discussion
1. Why would this contract need to be in writing? Which one of the five types is it?
2. Why did the court decline to decide whether a contract existed between Lamle and Mattel?
3. Do you think the court’s finding, that the e-mail could satisfy the writing requirement, makes
sense? Why or why not? Case Study: Sherman v....
View Full Document