Note Or Memorandum

No form of language used in a writing is necessary in order to comply with the Statute of Frauds, requiring some "note or memorandum" as evidence of a contract not in writing, provided that from the writing the intention may be gathered, and any writing from a solemn deed down to hasty notes or memoranda in books, papers, or letters will satisfy the statute, provided that the writing contains on its face or by reference to other writings, the names of the parties, a description of the property, sufficient for its identification, together with the terms, conditions and consideration. 209 111. 478.

An informal note or abstract of a transaction required by the statute of frauds. The form of it is immaterial; but it must contain the essential terms of the contract expressed with such a degree of certainty that it may be understood without reference to parol evidence to show intent of parties; Browne, Stat. of Fr. 353, 386; O’Donnell v. Leeman, 43 Me. 158, 60 Am. Dec. 54; Ta liman v. Franklin, 14 N. Y. 5S4; Johnson v. Brook, 31 Miss. 17, 66 Ain. Dec. 547; White v. Watkins, 23 Mo. 423; Mc Connell v. Brillhart, 17 111. 354, 65 Am. Dec. 661. In some states, and in England, the consideration need not be stated in the note or memorandum; 4 B. & Aid. 505; Violett v. Patton, 5 Cra. (U. S.) 142, 3 L. Ed. 61; Packard v. Richardson, 17 Mass. 122, 0 Am. Dec. 123; Sage v. Wilcox, 6 Conn. 81. A memorandum of the terms of an agreement was signed by plaintiff but not by defendant; the latter subsequently wrote ly payment.** There was no other arrangement between the parties, to which these expressions could refer. Held, that the letter and the document containing the terms of the arrangement together constituted a note and memorandum signed by defendant, within the statute of frauds; 45 L. T. Rep. N. S. 348. See Grafton v. Cummings, 90 IT. S. 100, 25 L Ed. 366; Bibb v. Allen, 149 U. S. 481, 13 Sup. Ct. 950, 37 L. Ed. 819; Lee v. Hills, 66 Ind. 474. See Browne; Reed, Stat. of Frauds; Memorandum.