Under UCC Article 2, which two elements must a writing contain to satisfy the Statute of Frauds?

Under UCC Article 2, which two elements must a writing contain to satisfy the Statute of Frauds?

• A. Quantity and date of delivery
• B. Signed by defendant
• C. Quantity and signed by defendant
• D. Description of goods and seller's address

Answer: (C)

The main idea is that for contracts for the sale of goods, the Statute of Frauds requires a writing that is signed by the party to be charged and that clearly indicates the quantity of goods to be sold. The signature ties the writing to the person being held to the bargain, and the quantity makes the agreement definite enough to enforce. In this scenario, the best choice is the one that shows both the quantity of goods and that the writing is signed by the defendant. The quantity requirement prevents a court from enforcing an uncertain or vague deal, while the signature requirement ensures there is a party who committed to the terms. Why the other options don’t fit: date of delivery isn’t required by the Statute of Frauds, so mentioning delivery date doesn’t satisfy the two essential elements. A writing signed by the defendant alone lacks the necessary quantity detail. A description of goods plus the seller’s address omits the vital quantity element, making the writing too indefinite to satisfy the Statute of Frauds.

The main idea is that for contracts for the sale of goods, the Statute of Frauds requires a writing that is signed by the party to be charged and that clearly indicates the quantity of goods to be sold. The signature ties the writing to the person being held to the bargain, and the quantity makes the agreement definite enough to enforce.

In this scenario, the best choice is the one that shows both the quantity of goods and that the writing is signed by the defendant. The quantity requirement prevents a court from enforcing an uncertain or vague deal, while the signature requirement ensures there is a party who committed to the terms.

Why the other options don’t fit: date of delivery isn’t required by the Statute of Frauds, so mentioning delivery date doesn’t satisfy the two essential elements. A writing signed by the defendant alone lacks the necessary quantity detail. A description of goods plus the seller’s address omits the vital quantity element, making the writing too indefinite to satisfy the Statute of Frauds.