Wright v. . Weeks .

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's judgment that the plaintiff could not enforce an alleged option to purchase land because the contract failed to satisfy the statute of frauds. The written instrument omitted the essential term of payment timing, and the court held that a parol agreement referenced in the writing could not supply the missing term. A concurring opinion agreed with the result and reiterated that the statute requires the entire agreement to be in writing.