Warning

Info

Table of Contents
UnreasonableWoman, SLS '24 |

0 0

Back to briefs

Waddle v. Elrod

(2012)

Tennessee Supreme Court - 367 S.W.3d 217

tl;dr:

One party agreed to transfer interest in real property as a settlement for a lawsuit, and their attorney accepted the agreement by responding to an email. Then, the party changed their mind about the settlement and claimed Statute of Frauds.

Video Summary


Case Summary

In Waddle v. Elrod (2012), the Supreme Court of Tennessee addressed the enforceability of a settlement agreement requiring a real property interest transfer under the statute of frauds. The statute of frauds requires certain contracts to be in writing and signed by involved parties to prevent fraud and perjury.

The case involved a property dispute between Earline Waddle and her niece, Lorene Elrod. Waddle contracted to sell part of the property to Regent Investments 1, LLC. However, Regent discovered Elrod's interest and sued both Waddle and Elrod. Waddle also sued Elrod, alleging Elrod obtained the quitclaim deed by undue influence. The parties agreed to settle out of court, with Elrod agreeing to transfer her interest back to Waddle. Their attorneys exchanged emails confirming the settlement agreement and signed with their names, but Elrod later refused to sign the final agreement. Waddle sought judicial enforcement, and the trial court granted the motion. Elrod appealed, arguing the settlement agreement was barred by the statute of frauds.

The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the statute of frauds didn't apply to settlement agreements made during litigation. The Supreme Court reversed this point, but held that the emails exchanged by the parties' attorneys satisfied the statute of frauds under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA). The Supreme Court found the parties intended to finalize the settlement electronically, and the emails constituted a writing for the statute of frauds, while the attorneys' typed names constituted electronic signatures under UETA.

This case matters because it illustrates how technology impacts contract formation and enforcement. It demonstrates that electronic communications can create legally binding obligations, especially involving significant matters like property rights, emphasizing the need for carefulness and clarity when using electronic means for negotiation or dispute settlement.

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Waddle v. Elrod

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Waddle v. Elrod case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingWaddle v. Elrod case brief facts & holding

Facts:Waddle and Elrod were about to go to trial on...

Holding:Reversed. Settlement agreements arising from litigation that involves real property...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Waddle v. Elrod case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Waddle v. Elrod | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: CORNELIA A. CLARK, C.J.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The case involves a dispute over a settlement agreement for the transfer of real property. The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that the Statute of Frauds applies to settlement agreements that require the transfer of an interest in real property and must be in writing, certain in its terms, and signed by the party to be charged with its performance. The UETA applies to electronic records and signatures related to a transaction and can constitute a signed memorandum, note, or writing for purposes of the Statute of Frauds. The court also ruled that electronic records and signatures cannot be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because they are in electronic form.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Waddle v. Elrod case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Waddle v. Elrod case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Waddle v. Elrod

Chat for Waddle v. Elrod
brief-172
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.