Also known as: part performance · part-performance doctrine · part performance doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An equitable exception to the statute of frauds that permits a court to order specific performance of an oral contract for the sale of land when the promisee has rendered part performance that unequivocally refers to the contract and would cause serious injustice if the agreement were not enforced.
Deborah Dunn orally agreed to buy land from Dillon Energy. After taking possession and paying part of the price, Deborah avoided the contract on grounds of incapacity and sought return of her payments. The court awarded restitution for the benefit conferred through part performance.
Damian Decker orally agreed with his neighbor to restrict use of his lot in exchange for shared access rights. Relying on the agreement, the neighbor installed utilities and made improvements. The court enforced the restriction under the doctrine despite the absence of a writing.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Dorothy Daniels orally agreed to sell land to a paving subcontractor who relied by taking possession and beginning improvements. After the buyer refused to convey, the court ordered specific performance because the acts of part performance satisfied the evidentiary and hardship tests.
Dolores Diaz and her husband sold their business and moved to care for an elderly man under an oral promise that his house would become theirs. After years of performance, the court enforced the agreement through specific performance based on the unequivocal acts of part performance.
Dwight Dorsey orally agreed to sell land to his relative. The buyer took possession, paid installments, and built substantial improvements on the property. The court granted specific performance because the acts of part performance satisfied the evidentiary and hardship tests.
Denise Donovan paid a deposit and took possession of property under an oral agreement with Dominion Capital. When the seller later refused to convey, the court ordered specific performance because the payment and possession constituted sufficient part performance to remove the contract from the statute of frauds.
Most jurisdictions require at least two of payment, possession, or valuable improvements that unequivocally refer to the oral land contract. Mere payment alone is usually insufficient because restitution remains available.
Supporting sources
The doctrine traditionally supports only equitable relief such as specific performance. Damages are generally unavailable unless specific performance has become impossible.
Supporting sources
Yes in some jurisdictions under the hardship or estoppel theory, though the evidentiary theory more commonly benefits buyers who have taken possession or made improvements.
Supporting sources
The doctrine operates as a judicial exception that removes the oral contract from the statute when the acts supply the evidentiary function the writing would have served and prevent injustice.
Supporting sources
…of the requested performance is given, the offeror will not revoke his offer, and that if tender is made it will be accepted. Part performance or tender may thus furnish consideration for the subsidiary promise. Moreover, merely acting in justifiable reliance on an offer may in some cases serve as sufficient reason for making a…