Question

Carol Mann and Gerald Harris worked for Helmsley-Spear, Inc. (HSI), as managers for various HSI properties. In 2005 each received a bo­nus of $50,000 for their work in converting an HSI apartment complex, known as Windsor Park, into a condominium complex. The conversion started in 2002 and took three years. The bonus was paid pursuant to an oral contract made in December of 2001 that promised a bonus (above their salary) when the project was completed. HIS was very happy with their work and indicated that other projects are planned. In 2006 Mann and Harris were asked by HIS to work on another conversion of an apartment building known as Park West. For this project Mann and Harris were again orally promised a bonus (above their salary) using the formula similar to the Windsor Park conversion. It was understood that this project would also require two or three years to complete. In 2009, after successfully converting Park West, Mann and Harris were fired. HSI refused to pay them the bonus. Mann and Harris sued. Among other things, HSI contended that their oral agreement concerning the extra com­pensation was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.

Answer 1

Answer:

True - Contracts that cannot be completed in less than one Year must be written

Explanation:

The extract from the scenario that requires focus for the answer to the question is that ''In 2006 Mann and Harris were asked by HIS to work on another conversion of an apartment building known as Park West. For this project Mann and Harris were again orally promised a bonus (above their salary) using the formula similar to the Windsor Park conversion. It was understood that this project would also require two or three years to complete.''

Under statute of frauds, it is required that contracts that will last for more than 1 year should be written to be enforceable.

At the point where Mann and Harris were asked to perform another construction of apartment that would take up to two or three years to complete, they ought to have requested that the contract be in writing.

His had taken undue advantage of the knowledge of the Law and refused to them the bonus, yet in the eyes of the Law, according to statute of frauds, he cannot be wrong.