Under the Statute of Frauds, which type of contract would typically require a writing to be enforceable?

• A. A contract for the sale of real estate
• B. A contract for a snack delivery
• C. A short-term service with immediate completion
• D. A consent-based verbal agreement

Answer: (A)

Under the Statute of Frauds, contracts that transfer an interest in real property must be in writing to be enforceable. This rule exists because land deals are high-stakes and long-lasting, so a written document helps prevent fraud and provides clear evidence of the agreed terms—who is involved, what is being bought or sold, the price, property description, and signatures of the parties. A contract for the sale of real estate clearly falls into this category, so it would typically require a written agreement to be enforceable.

The other scenarios don’t inherently require writing under the Statute of Frauds. A snack-delivery contract is a simple service arrangement that can be performed relatively quickly and doesn’t involve transferring an interest in land, so it isn’t automatically required to be in writing. A short-term service with immediate completion could be fully performed within a year and would not trigger the writing requirement. A consent-based verbal agreement may be enforceable as an oral contract unless it falls into another Statute of Frauds category; by itself, it isn’t the type that inherently demands a writing.