Illinois exam glossary
Statute of Frauds
The Statute of Frauds is about proving certain agreements with signed written evidence. You do not need an allegation of deception for it to apply. In a land-sale question, identify the agreement, the terms in the record and the person against whom enforcement is sought.
Last reviewed:
The short answer
Illinois generally requires a land-sale agreement to have sufficient written evidence signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought, or an agent lawfully authorized in writing. A sale closing within a year is not exempt merely because closing is soon. A lease longer than one year also raises the writing requirement. Missing required writing ordinarily creates an enforceability defense; it does not automatically prove that no agreement was ever made.
This is the national Contracts concept with Illinois Frauds Act Sections 1-3 and current electronic-transaction law. Writing, contract formation, recording and deed delivery are separate issues. Whether an exception permits a particular remedy depends on the actual agreement and facts.
Check the agreement, the record and the signer
- Classify the agreement. A contract to sell land falls under Section 2 even when closing is planned soon. A lease for more than one year concerns a longer interest in land. Section 1 separately addresses agreements not to be performed within one year from making; do not confuse that test with a sale closing date.
- Read the complete record. A formal contract is common, but the statute also permits a sufficient memorandum or note. A signature alone is not enough: the record must establish the bargain and its essential terms, including an identifiable property and the material sale terms. Several writings do not combine automatically merely because they concern the same people.
- Identify the party to be charged. This means the person against whom enforcement is sought. If the buyer seeks to compel the seller to convey, examine the seller's signature or the proper agent's signature and authority. It does not always mean buyer, seller or person paying the bill.
- Check authority and electronic assent. Section 2 addresses an agent authorized in writing signed by the principal. Illinois UETA recognizes qualifying electronic records and signatures when the parties agree to transact electronically. Confirm attribution, intent, the adopted terms and the Act's scope; an unexplained typed name is not conclusive proof.
- Separate the writing from other contract elements. Section 3 allows consideration to be proved or disproved outside the writing. That does not eliminate consideration, assent or the need for sufficiently definite essential terms. Do not read it as permission to leave every material sale term unresolved.
- Test only an exception supported by the facts. Full performance, equitable part performance and other doctrines require careful proof of the agreement and the relevant conduct. A deposit alone is not an automatic exception. The requested remedy matters; do not assume an equitable argument permits every claim for damages. First establish that an agreement was actually made. Calling an act performance cannot supply a bargain that never existed.
| Question | Illinois study rule | Avoid this shortcut |
|---|---|---|
| Land sale closing in 90 days | Section 2 still governs the sale agreement | Less than one year until closing does not remove the land-sale writing requirement. |
| Lease with a fixed two-year term | Longer-than-one-year interest in land | Oral agreement is not automatically sufficient because monthly rent is paid. |
| Other agreement not to be performed within one year of making | Section 1 supplies a separate timing rule | Do not measure only the period after performance begins. |
| Buyer seeks enforcement against seller | Seller is the party to be charged on those facts | A signature by the person bringing the claim is not always the relevant signature. |
| Consideration not recited in the memorandum | Section 3 permits other legal proof | This does not dispense with an identifiable property, material sale terms or the underlying contract element. |
Work through the facts
Oral sale discussion
A buyer and owner orally agree on a $90,000 lot sale closing in 90 days. No sufficient record is signed by the owner or a properly authorized signer, and no exception facts are supplied.
- The transaction is a land sale, even though performance is planned within one year.
- The question states no sufficient signed evidence against the owner.
- The short closing period does not remove the Section 2 writing issue.
Answer: The oral bargain faces the Illinois Statute of Frauds enforcement defense.
Unauthorized agent signature
A friend signs a sale memorandum in the owner's name, but the owner gave no written authority and refuses to ratify it.
- The friend purports to sign for the party to be charged.
- Section 2 refers to an agent lawfully authorized in writing signed by that party.
- The facts do not establish that authority.
Answer: The friend's signature does not satisfy the stated authority requirement.
Electronic platform record
The parties agree to transact electronically. The seller intentionally signs the complete final land contract electronically, and the retained record establishes the seller's act and the terms adopted.
- Current Illinois UETA recognizes qualifying electronic writings and signatures.
- An electronic record still needs the necessary terms and attributable assent.
- The electronic form does not cure fraud, lack of authority or another substantive defect.
Answer: The electronic signature can satisfy the writing-and-signature screen.
Partial deposit only
A buyer pays $10,000 after an oral land discussion but has no possession, signed writing, improvements, or other exception facts.
- Payment is evidence that negotiations or a transaction occurred.
- Illinois decisions do not make partial purchase-price payment an automatic exception.
- The exact agreement and equitable facts would require legal proof.
Answer: Do not treat the $10,000 payment alone as defeating the Statute of Frauds.
Insufficient property description
A signed note says seller will convey one of my lots to buyer for $50,000, but supplies no selection method or identifying facts.
- The note has a signature and price.
- It does not identify which parcel is promised.
- A court cannot safely determine the subject real estate from the stated record.
Answer: The signed note still has a material property-certainty problem.
Mistakes to avoid
- Looking for actual fraud: The Statute of Frauds is a writing rule; deception is not required.
- Calling every oral agreement void: Use unenforceable when the stated defect is failure of required form.
- Ignoring written agent authority: Section 2 expressly addresses an agent lawfully authorized in writing signed by the party.
- Accepting a signature without terms: The signed record must still identify the essential bargain with sufficient certainty.
- Assuming scattered emails automatically combine: The writings must be legally connected and collectively satisfy the signed memorandum requirement.
- Treating a typed name as automatically authentic: Verify who placed it, with what intent, on which final terms.
- Requiring consideration to be recited: Section 3 permits consideration to be proved or disproved by other legal evidence.
- Saying consideration need not exist: The section changes proof in the writing, not the underlying contract element.
- Using any payment as part performance: Partial payment alone does not automatically remove the writing defense.
- Confusing contract and deed: The contract promises a future transfer; the deed conveys the estate upon valid delivery.
Check your understanding
These are original teaching questions, not recalled or predicted PSI questions. Answer first, then explain why the other choices fail.
1. An Illinois owner orally agrees to sell a parcel with closing in 90 days. No sufficient signed memorandum or exception is stated. Which answer is best?
- The agreement becomes a deed because the price was agreed
- The land-sale agreement still faces the Section 2 writing requirement
- Only sales closing more than one year later need written evidence
- The short closing period automatically avoids the Statute of Frauds
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. The land-sale agreement still faces the Section 2 writing requirement
A land sale does not escape Section 2 merely because closing is within a year. The separate one-year performance rule is not a universal exemption for short-closing land sales. Agreeing on a price also does not produce a deed or establish a sufficient signed record.
2. A buyer sues to compel an Illinois seller to convey under an alleged land-sale agreement. Who is the party to be charged for the statutory signature question?
- Always the buyer, because the buyer pays
- The seller against whom enforcement is sought
- Always the listing broker
- Both parties only because the phrase means everyone in the transaction
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. The seller against whom enforcement is sought
The direction of enforcement identifies the party to be charged, here the seller. The person paying and the broker are not automatically that party. The statutory signature question is distinct from proving mutual assent and obtaining a properly completed agreement.
3. A seller signs a note promising one of my lots for $50,000. The record contains no way to select or identify the lot. What remains wrong?
- The problem is only that the note was not recorded
- The signature automatically supplies every missing term
- The record fails to identify the promised real estate with sufficient certainty
- The stated price proves that every other requirement is met
Show answer and explanation
Answer: C. The record fails to identify the promised real estate with sufficient certainty
A signature and a price do not identify which property is promised. Neither supplies the missing selection method or essential bargain. Recording is a different issue; it would not by itself cure the described uncertainty.
4. The parties agree to transact electronically and the seller adopts a complete land-sale record with an electronic signature attributable to the seller. What is the best conclusion about form?
- Any typed name proves acceptance of every attachment
- Electronic form can satisfy writing and signature requirements when UETA applies
- Electronic records can never support an Illinois land sale
- Attribution alone cures missing assent and every substantive defect
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. Electronic form can satisfy writing and signature requirements when UETA applies
Qualifying electronic form is recognized under Illinois UETA. Agreement to electronic transactions, adopted terms, intent and attribution matter. Electronic form alone does not cure every substantive defect, and an unexplained typed name does not prove assent to every attachment.
5. A buyer pays a partial deposit after an oral land-sale discussion but has no sufficient signed record. No other performance or exception facts are given. Does the payment automatically defeat the writing defense?
- No, because consideration is forbidden in a land sale
- Yes, if a broker receives the money
- No, payment alone does not automatically establish a performance exception
- Yes, any deposit makes the oral contract enforceable
Show answer and explanation
Answer: C. No, payment alone does not automatically establish a performance exception
Illinois decisions do not treat partial purchase-price payment alone as an automatic exception. Payment to a broker does not change that principle. Consideration is not forbidden; the issue is the required writing and whether proven facts establish an applicable exception and remedy.
6. What does Section 3 of the Illinois Frauds Act say about consideration in the writing?
- Consideration never needs to exist
- A missing property description is cured whenever a deposit is paid
- Only cash consideration can support a land contract
- Consideration need not be expressed there and may be proved or disproved by other legal evidence
Show answer and explanation
Answer: D. Consideration need not be expressed there and may be proved or disproved by other legal evidence
Section 3 concerns how consideration can be proved. It does not eliminate consideration as a contract element, restrict it to cash or cure every missing essential term. Distinguish a recital of consideration from whether a sufficiently definite bargain exists.
Common questions
What is the Statute of Frauds?
The Statute of Frauds is a rule requiring specified agreements to be evidenced by a signed writing before an enforcement action can succeed. Illinois calls its statute the Frauds Act. It does not mean that fraud occurred. Its purpose is evidentiary: important promises should not depend only on disputed memory of an oral conversation.
What does Illinois require for a contract to sell land?
Section 2 generally requires sufficient written evidence signed by the party against whom the land-sale agreement is enforced, or an agent lawfully authorized in writing. A sale closing in weeks or months is not excluded simply because it can close within one year. A sufficiently complete signed contract is the usual practical record, while the statute also allows a qualifying memorandum or note.
Who is the party to be charged?
The party to be charged is the person against whom enforcement is sought. If a buyer sues the seller to compel the sale, the seller is ordinarily the party being charged. The statute's minimum signature wording does not make one-sided signatures good brokerage practice. A complete purchase contract should show both parties' assent and delivery.
What information should the writing contain?
The signed record should identify the parties, the real estate with reasonable certainty, the price or workable pricing method, and essential transaction obligations. It may consist of a contract or legally connected writings, but whether multiple records combine into a sufficient memorandum is a legal question. A vague note saying house deal is not a safe land-sale memorandum.
Does an Illinois lease need to be in writing?
Section 2 expressly covers an interest in land for a term longer than one year, and section 1 separately covers agreements not to be performed within one year. A lease exceeding the statutory period therefore requires careful writing and signature analysis. Other landlord-tenant statutes, local ordinances, and brokerage rules can require additional written terms or disclosures.
Can an electronic signature satisfy the Illinois writing requirement?
Yes, when current Illinois UETA applies and the writing, signature, agreement-to-electronic-transactions and attribution requirements are satisfied. A typed name or click is not automatically proof of the right person's intent to adopt every term. UETA replaced the repealed Electronic Commerce Security Act; do not rely on the old Act as current authority.
Must consideration be written in the memorandum?
No. Section 3 of the Illinois Frauds Act states that consideration for an agreement within the Act need not be expressed in the writing and may be proved or disproved by other legal evidence. The rule concerns how consideration is proved. It does not remove consideration as a contract element or excuse missing essential terms.
Does partial payment remove an oral land contract from the Statute of Frauds?
Not automatically. Illinois decisions warn that partial payment of purchase price alone can be insufficient. Performance doctrines require exact facts, clear proof of the alleged agreement, reliance connected to that agreement, and an appropriate equitable remedy. An exam answer should not turn any deposit, improvement, or possession into a universal exception.
What is part performance?
Part performance is an equitable doctrine that can matter when sufficiently proved conduct is tied to an actual oral land agreement. It is not a universal deposit, possession or improvements exception. Actions before an agreement existed, or conduct explained by a different relationship, may not prove performance of the claimed bargain. The agreement, reliance, facts and requested remedy all matter.
Does the Statute of Frauds make every oral agreement void?
No. For a question whose stated defect is failure of the required signed writing, unenforceable is ordinarily the appropriate study category. Courts may use other terminology in particular contexts. The statute does not by itself decide whether an agreement was made, whether a defense was waived or whether a different remedy is available.
Does a signed land-sale contract have to be recorded to satisfy the Statute of Frauds?
Recording and the Statute of Frauds answer different questions. The writing rule concerns sufficient signed evidence of the agreement. Recording concerns public notice and protection of interests under recording law. Recording an indefinite or unsigned paper does not automatically fix the writing defect.
Keep practising
Your next practice step
Put contracts into practice
Check formation, status and the parties' obligations before choosing a remedy.
These web resources are free. The app has a separate free starter tier and optional paid full access.
Official sources and scope
Reviewed October 24, 2026 against the Illinois Frauds Act, current UETA and the cited published Illinois opinions. The former Electronic Commerce Security Act was repealed effective June 25, 2021. Official indexed statutory text was used where direct retrieval failed; the relevant official court PDF text was read. These are original practice questions, not PSI questions.
- PSI Illinois Candidate Information Booklet effective June 24, 2026
- Illinois General Assembly, 740 ILCS 80/1 one-year and other covered promises
- Illinois General Assembly, 740 ILCS 80/2 contracts for sale of land and interests
- Illinois General Assembly, 740 ILCS 80/3 proof of consideration
- 815 ILCS 333/5, /7, /9 and /20.87: current UETA and repeal of the Electronic Commerce Security Act
- Gagnon v. Schickel, 2012 IL App (1st) 120645, paragraphs 19-22: alleged agreement, exhibits and performance issue
- Berkowitz v. Urso, 2014 IL App (1st) 121662, paragraphs 37-43: essential terms and partial-payment limits
This is exam preparation, not advice for a specific transaction. State law and the applicable facts control. Our editorial and corrections process explains how to report an issue.