Evelyn Vollmer orally agreed to loan Danny Lang $150,000 to make an investment in a local nightclub. The loan was to be repaid from the profits received from the investment. Their agreement was never memorialized in writing, however. Eighteen months later, Lang had paid only $15,000 on the loan from the profits from the business. Vollmer filed a lawsuit alleging breach of contract. Using the information presented in the chapter, answer the following questions.

Lang claimed that repayment of the loan would “almost certainly” take over a year and that his agreement with Vollmer was therefore unenforceable because it was not in writing. Is he correct? Explain.

Suppose that a week after Vollmer gave Lang the funds, she sent him an e-mail containing the terms of their loan agreement with her named typed at the bottom. Lang did not respond to the e-mail. Is this sufficient as a writing under the Statute of Frauds?

Assume that at trial the court finds that the contract falls within the Statute of Frauds. Further assume that the state in which the court sits recognizes every exception to the Statute of Frauds discussed in the chapter. What exception provides Vollmer with the best chance of enforcing the oral contract in this situation?

Suppose that at trial, Lang never raises the argument that the parties’ agreement violates the Statute of Frauds, and the court rules in favor of Vollmer. Then Lang appeals and raises the Statute of Frauds for the first time. What exception can Vollmer now argue?