HOLDINGS: [1]-With regard to oral contracts that fall within the statute of frauds category under Civ. Code, § 1624, subd. (a)(1), of contracts not to be performed within a year, the promisee’s full performance of all of obligations under the contract takes the contract out of the statute of frauds, and no further showing of estoppel is required; [2]-An allegation that plaintiff fully performed his obligations under an oral contract relating to film development was enough to avoid the statute of frauds and it was error to find that his claims seeking pay and executive producer credit for a sequel were barred by the statute of frauds absent an estoppel to assert the statute; [3]-The two-year statute of limitations under Code Civ. Proc., § 339, did not bar a quantum meruit claim because the statute did not begin to run until the sequel was released.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. provides information on B&P 17200.
Outcome
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
