Statute of Frauds and Emails — Typing a Name at Bottom of Email Sufficient to Satisfy Statute, But “Pre-Printed” Signature Is Not

Rhodium Special Opportunity Fund, LLC v. Life Trading Holdco, LLC, 2014 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1525 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. Mar. 31, 2014):

Courts in New York have held that an email may constitute a writing for the purpose of the statute of frauds. See Naldi v Grunberg, 80 AD3d 1, 14, 908 N.Y.S.2d 639 (1st Dept 2010); Williamson v Delsener, 59 AD3d 291, 874 N.Y.S.2d 41 (1st Dept 2009); Steven v Publicis. S.A., 50 AD3d 253, 854 N.Y.S.2d 690 (1st Dept 2008). The courts have focused on the requirement of a signature to determine when emails meet the requirement. In Rosenfeld v Zerneck, 776 NYS2d 458, 460, 4 Misc. 3d 193 (Sup Ct 2004), the court held that typing a name on the bottom of an email indicated authentication in the way that a signature would on paper for the statute of frauds. The act of typing the name matters, as a pre-printed signature in an email footer has been held to be insufficient as a signature for an email to meet the statute of frauds. Landesbank v 45 John St. LLC, 102 AD3d 587, 960 N.Y.S.2d 64 (1st Dept 2013). In the instant case, the set of emails had typed signatures that met the signature requirement.

Share this article:

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on email
Email

Recent Posts

Archives