Martha A. Nix and Charles E. Upham v. Skip Wick, Christie Wick, and James Robert Oldfield

Summary

The court affirmed summary judgment for the defendants because the written agreement for the additional acreage did not identify the land with sufficient certainty under the Statute of Frauds. A future survey could not supply the missing identification, and the court held that the fraud-in-the-inducement theory could not avoid the Statute of Frauds. The court also declined to consider several unsupported appellate arguments. Justice Murdock, dissenting, would have preserved a possible remedy to rescind the home-sale transaction if the alleged fraud were proven.