Quote:
Originally Posted by the
Why would such a statute govern this guy getting ripped off for $7500?
There is no other, non-contract cause of action that he could assert to recover his money? Fraud? Common counts? Money had and received? Nothing like that?
Hard to believe that under the facts given by K. Roman, he would have no legal theory upon which to recover his $7500. But you're the fancy lawyer.
|
Oh there are other civil theories...conversion comes to mind. SOF is generally a defense to contract disputes.
The idea behind SOF's is to memorialize substantial transactions. So what if the guy comes into court and says "This was a gift because we were old friends and I was on hard times. If it was a business deal why didn't he insist on something in writing?"
I'd need a lot more facts before I could comment further. Was it a loan? A speculative investment? Where was the contract entered into? Which state has jurisdiction (choice of law problem)?
And just WHO are you calling fancy?
