169 F.Supp.2d 124 (2001)
The artist contended that New York law applied and that New York's statute of frauds barred enforcement of the oral management agreement. The manager countered that California law applied and that under the California statute of frauds, the management agreement was enforceable.
- The court found that California law was applicable.
- The manager resided in California and negotiated and entered the terms of the oral management agreement in California.
- Any actions taken by the manager in performing the agreement were in California.
- Thus, the contract was not barred by the statute of frauds.
- The court further found that the oral contract as alleged was sufficiently definite to be enforced because the terms personal representative and manager, standing alone, created enforceable rights and duties.
The artist's motion to dismiss and, in alternative, for summary judgement was denied.
Suggested law school course materials, hornbooks, and guides for Contract Law
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.