Reference no: EM132898455

Seck, a real estate broker, had known Foulks for a long time. Foulks asked Seck to help him sell his ranch and Seck agreed. However, Foulks refused to give Seck a formal listing agreement. "You know doggone well, you know me, I'm not going to cheat you out of a commission," said Foulks. Nevertheless, Seck took out one of his business cards and jotted down the basic terms of the listing on the back of the card. He wrote down the price, deposit amount, and the terms of the promissory note, along with the phrase, "6% comm." Seck then asked Foulks to initial and date the card. Foulks wrote, "3/24/65 GWF." Seck found a buyer for the ranch, but Foulks refused to pay Seck a commission. When Seck sued, Foulks argued that the notes on the business card weren't enough to comply with the statute of frauds.

1) Did the statute of Frauds require more than the notes (what was written on the card) for this agreement to be valid? Why or why not?