Under the Statutes of Frauds, contracts must be in writing to be enforceable. Such contracts are termed:

• A. Unenforceable
• B. Void
• C. Voidable
• D. Valid

Answer: (A)

When a contract falls under the Statutes of Frauds and isn’t in writing, it cannot be enforced in court. That is the meaning of being unenforceable: the parties may have a valid agreement, but the law won’t allow a lawsuit to compel performance because the writing requirement wasn’t met.

It’s not considered void because a void contract has no legal effect from the outset. It’s also not voidable, which would mean one party has the option to cancel for a defect like misrepresentation or lack of capacity. And it isn’t valid because enforceability, not existence, is what’s being determined here; the absence of a required writing prevents enforcement under the statute, even though the parties may still have an actual agreement.

An example helps: a contract for the sale of real estate that isn’t in writing isn’t enforceable under the Statute of Frauds, even though both sides may have agreed to it. It could still exist as a contract between them, and certain exceptions (like part performance) might restore enforceability in limited circumstances.