35 adopted in Massachusetts is found in the decisions of a few other States, and of the Supreme Court of the United States." Almost always it is the buyer who seeks to enforce specifically an oral contract on grounds of part performance, but it is well settled that the seller also may enforce the buyer's obligation, if the circumstances are such that the buyer could maintain a suit had the seller made default.36 Though cases of part performance by the seller will be rare where there has been no transfer of possession, such a situation seems possible. It has been said in England-"If I agree with A by parol, without writing, that I will build a house on my land, and then will sell it to him at a stipulated price, and in pursuance of that agreement I build a house, this may afford me ground for compelling A to complete the purchase," "7 and though in a later case it was questioned whether this statement would be accurate without further facts, it was held that where the seller had built a house for the buyer and the latter during the progress of the building visited the site and suggested material alterations and improvements, which were carried out by the seller, specific performance would be decreed against the buyer.38 In a few States the doctrine that part performance validates an oral contract is wholly denied. 39 580, 54 N. E. 257; Perkins v. Perkins, 181 Mass. 401, 63 N. E. 926; Traveler Shoe Co. v. Koch, 216 Mass. 412, 103 N. E. 931. 35 Purcell v. Miner, 4 Wall. 513, 18 L. Ed. 455 (cf. Townsend v. Vanderwerker, 160 U. S. 171, 183, 40 L. Ed. 383, 16 S. Ct. 258); Sample v. Horlacher, 177 Pa. 247, 35 Atl. 615; Derr v. Ackerman, 182 Pa. 591, 38 Atl. 475; Morris c. Gaines, 82 Tex. 255, 17 S. W. 538; Weatherford, etc., Ry. Co. v. Wood, 88 Tex. 191, 194, 30 S. W. 859, 28 L. R. A. 526. In Sears v. Reddick, 211 Fed. 856, 128 C. C. A. 234 (Kans.), the court said (citing Kansas decisions) that irreparable injury was the test, not possession or improvements. 36 Pyke v. Williams, 2 Vern. 455; Ducie v. Ford, 138 U. S. 587, 594, 34 L. Ed. 1091, 11 S. Ct. 417; Hodges v. Kowing, 58 Conn. 12, 18 Atl. 979, 7 L. R. A. 87; Andrew v. Babcock, 63 Conn. 109, 26 Atl. 715; Witt v. Booth, 98 Kans. 554, 158 Pac. 851; Wharton v. Stoutenburgh, 35 N. J. Eq. 266; Harris v. Knickerbacker, 5 Wend. 638; Reed v. Reed, 12 Pa. 117; Johnson v. Puget Mill Co., 28 Wash. 515, 68 Pac. 867; Steenrod's Adm. v. W. P. & B. R. Co., 27 W. Va. 1. 37 Caton v. Caton, L. R. 1 Ch. 137, and this passage was referred to without comment by Kay, J., in McManus v. Cooke, 35 Ch. D. 681. 38 Dickinson v. Barron, [1904] 2 Ch. 339, Kekewich, J. 39 Quirk v. Bank of Commerce, 244 Fed. 682, 687, 157 C. C. A. 130 (Tennessee law); Usher v. Flood, 83 Ky. 552; Bullitt v. Eastern Kentucky Land Co., 99 Ky. 324, 36 S. W. 16; Coffey v. The doctrine is exclusively enforced by courts of equity powers. 40 § 495. Agreements not to be performed within a year. It is well settled that the oral agreements invalidated by the statute because not to be performed within a year include those only which cannot be performed within that period. A promise which is not likely to be performed within a year, and which in fact is not performed within a year is not within the statute if at the time the contract is made there is a possibility in law and in fact that full performance such as the parties intended may be completed before the expiration of a year. Humble, 154 Ky. 708, 159 S. W. 554; Niles v. Davis, 60 Miss. 750, 752; Washington v. Soria, 73 Miss. 665, 19 So. 485, 55 Am. St. Rep. 555; Barnes v. Brown, 71 N. C. 507; White v. Holly, 91 N. C. 67; Ridley v. McNairy, 2 Humph. 174; Goodloe v. Goodloe, 116 Tenn. 252, 92 S. W. 767, 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 703. 40 In O'Herlihy v. Hedges, 1 Sch. & Lef. 123, 130, Lord Redesdale said: "But this is a contract on which no action at law could be maintained, notwithstanding what Mr. Justice Buller says in one or two cases [Brodie v. St. Paul, 1 Ves. Jr. 326, 333], that part performance takes a case out of the statute, at law as well as in equity. That opinion will be found wrong; and I recollect Mr. Justice Buller, upon being pressed with the consequences of that opinion in case of a demurrer to evidence, being obliged to abandon the position. The ground on which a court of equity goes in cases of part performance is that sort of fraud which is cognizable in equity only." To the same effect, see Cooth v. Jackson, 6 Ves. 12, 39; Quirk v. Bank of Commerce, 242 Fed. 682, 687, 157 C. C. A. 130; Henry v. Wells, 48 Ark. 485, 3 S. W. 637; Eaton v. Whitaker, 18 Conn. 222, 44 Am. Dec. 586; Dougherty v. Catlett, 129 Ill. 431, 21 N. E. 932; 41 Chicago Co. v. Davis Co., 142 III. 171, 31 N. E. 438; Leavitt v. Stern, 159 Ill. 526, 42 N. E. 869; Barickman v. Kuykendall, 6 Blackf. 21, 24; Norton v. Preston, 15 Me. 14, 32 Am. Dec. 128; Kidder v. Hunt, 1 Pick. 328, 11 Am. Dec. 183; Adams v. Townsend, 1 Met. 483; Bartlett v. Bartlett, 103 Mich. 293, 61 N. W. 500; Nally v. Reading, 107 Mo. 350, 17 S. W. 978; Lane v. Shackford, 5 N. H. 130, 132; Smith v. Phillips, 69 N. H. 470, 43 Atl. 183; White v. Poole, 74 N. H. 71, 65 Atl. 255; Russell v. Briggs, 165 N. Y. 509, 59 N. E. 303, 53 L. R. A. 556; Davis v. Moore, 9 Rich. 215; Brown v. Pollard, 89 Va. 696, 701, 17 S. E. 6; Kimmins v. Oldham, 27 W. Va. 258. But see contra-Follmer v. Dale, 9 Pa. 83. 41 Smith v. Neale, 2 C. B. (N. S.) 67; Ridley v. Ridley, 34 Beav. 478; McGregor v. McGregor, 21 Q. B. D. 424 (overruling Davey v. Shannon, 4 Exch. D. 81); Lavalette v. Riches, 24 T. L. R. 336; Nester v. Diamond Match Co., 143 Fed. 72, 74 C. C. A. 266; American Fine Art Co. v. Simon, 140 Fed. 529, 72 C. C. A. 45; Quirk v. Bank of Commerce, 244 Fed. 682, 157 C. C. A. 130; Heflin v. Milton, 69 Ala. 354; Sweet v. Desha Lumber Co., 56 Ark. 629, 20 S. W. 514; Graham v. Jonesboro, etc., R. Co., 111 Ark. 598, Therefore, a contract of insurance for a term of years to begin within a year, is not within the statute, since by the terms of the contract a contingency or contingencies may occur within the 164 S. W. 729; Buckley v. Continental Gin Co., 113 Ark. 15, 166 S. W. 744; Bonner v. Kimball-Lacy Lumber Co., 114 Ark. 42, 169 S. W. 242; Bank of Orland v. Finnell, 133 Cal. 475, 65 Pac. 976; Woodall v. Davis-Cresswell Mfg. Co., 9 Col. App. 198, 48 Pac. 670; Clark v. Pendleton, 20 Conn. 495; Sarles v. Sharlow, 5 Dak. 100, 37 N. W. 748; Devalinger v. Maxwell, 4 Pennewill, 185, 54 Atl. 684; Young Men's Christian Assoc. v. Estill, 140 Ga. 291, 78 S. E. 1075, 48 L. R. A. (N. S.) 783, Ann. Cas. 1914 D. 136; White v. Murtland, 71 Ill. 250, 22 Am. Rep. 100; Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Ritsher, 196 Ill. App. 27; Straughan v. Indianapolis, etc., R. Co., 38 Ind. 185; Durham v. Hiatt, 127 Ind. 514, 26 N. E. 401; Sutphen v. Sutphen, 30 Kans. 510, 2 Pac. 100; Aiken v. Nogle, 47 Kans. 96, 27 Pac. 825; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Offut, 99 Ky. 427, 36 S. W. 181, 59 Am. St. Rep. 467; Story v. Story, 22 Ky. L. Rep. 1731, 1869, 61 S. W. 279, 62 S. W. 865; Whitley v. Whitley's Adm., 26 Ky. L. Rep. 134, 80 S. W. 825; Owensboro Tool Co. v. Moore, 154 Ky. 431, 157 S. W. 1121; Walker v. Metropolitan Ins. Co., 56 Me. 371; Neal v. Parker, 98 Md. 254, 57 Atl. 213; Campbell v. Burnett, 120 Md. 214, 87 Atl. 894; Carnig vCarr, 167 Mass. 544, 46 N. E. 117, 35 L. R. A. 512, 57 Am. St. Rep. 488; Scribner v. Flagg Mfg. Co., 175 Mass. 536, 56 N. E. 603; Collins v. Snow, 218 Mass. 542, 106 N. E. 148; Elwell v. State Mut. L. Assur. Co., 230 Mass. 248, 119 N. E. 794; Smalley v. Mitchell, 110 Mich. 650, 68 N. W. 978; Wiebeler v. Milwaukee Ins. Co., 30 Minn. 464, 16 N. W. 363; Stitt v. Rat Portage Co., 98 Minn. 52, 107 N. W. 824; Green v. Whaley, 271 Mo. 636, 197 S. W. 355; Boggs v. Pacific Laundry Co., 86 Mo. App. 616; Simmons v. Simmons, 95 Neb. 607, 146 N. W. 951; Gault v. Brown, 48 N. H. 183; Burgesser v. Wendel, 73 N. J. L. 286, 62 Atl. 994; Smith v. Balch (N. J. L.), 105 Atl. 17; Blake v. Voigt, 134 N. Y. 69, 31 N. E. 256, 30 Am. St. Rep. 622; Jones v. Pouch, 41 Ohio St. 146; Nonamaker v. Amos, 73 Ohio St. 163, 76 N. E. 949, 4 L. R. A. (N. S.) 980, 112 Am. St. Rep. 708; Hodges v. Richmond Mfg. Co., 9 R. I. 482; Groce v. West Lumber Co. (Tex. Civ. App.), 165 S. W. 519; Adair v. Stallings (Tex. Civ. App.), 165 S. W. 140; Seddon v. Rosenbaum, 85 Va. 928, 9 S. E. 326, 3 L. R. A. 337; Reckley v. Zenn, 74 W. Va. 43, 81 S. E. 565; McClanahan v. Otto Marmet &c. Co., 74 W. Va. 543, 82 S. E. 752; Rua v. Bowyer Smokeless Coal Co. (W. Va.), 99 S. E. 213. See also cases in this section passim. The leading case is Warner v. Texas, etc., R. Co., 164 U. S. 418, 17 S. Ct. 147, 41 L. Ed. 495, where the defendant orally promised to maintain a switch for the plaintiff "as long as he needed it." The switch was maintained for thirteen years and then abolished. The railway company was held liable. Somewhat similar in their facts are Graham v. Jonesboro, etc., R. Co., 111 Ark. 598, 164 S. W. 729; Frankfort, etc., R. Co. v. Jackson, 153 Ky. 534, 156 S. W. 103; Thomas v. South Haven, etc., Co., 138 Mich. 50, 100 N. W. 1009. A few decisions hold that a contract which the parties do not expect to be performed within a year is within the statute, regardless of other possibilities. Izard v. Middleton, 1 Desauss. 116; Jones v. McMichael, 12 Rich. L. 176 (see Batesburg Cotton Oil Co. v. Jones, 96 S. C. 148, 80 S. E. 86). See also-Carney v. Mosher, 97 Mich. 554, 56 N. W. 935. In Warren Chemical & Mfg. Co. v. Holbrook, 118 N. Y. 586, 593, 23 N. E. 908, 16 Am. St. Rep. 788, the court said: "While it is true, as insisted by the appellant, that it was not provided by the terms of the contract that it should be performed within one year from its making, neither was it provided that it should not be performed within such period. Nothing whatever was said as to time. Now the statute does not include an agreement which is not likely to be performed, nor yet one which is simply not expected to be performed within the space of a year. Neither does it include an agreement which, fairly and reasonably interpreted, admits of a valid execution within that time, although it may not be probable that it will be. (Kent v. Kent, 62 N. Y. 560, 20 Am. Rep. 502.)" year which will require the full payment of the policy. 42 Nor is an oral promise performable on the marriage of the promisee unenforceable, 43 nor a promise of performance or forbearance during the life of a specified person," nor a promise performable gor v. McGregor, 21 Q. B. D. 424 (to pay a separate wife a weekly allowance for maintenance. This case expressly overrules Davey v. Shannon, 4 Ex. D. 81, and apparently by implication, Eley v. Positive Government, etc., Co., 1 Exch. D. 20, 88); Hampton v. Caldwell, 95 Ark. 387, 129 S. W. 816; Osgood v. Skinner, 111 Ill. App. 606 (not to compete); Hill v. Jamieson, 16 Ind. 125, 79 Am. Dec. 414 (not to compete); Bell v. Hewitt's Ex., 24 Ind. 280 (to leave property by will); Harper v. Harper, 57 Ind. 547 (to support for life); Welz v. Rhodius, 87 Ind. 1, 44 Am. Rep. 747 (not to compete); Cox v. Baltimore, etc., R. Co., 180 Ind. 495, 103 N. E. 337, 50 L. R. A. (N. S.) 453 (to serve for employee's life or as long as he proved competent and worthy); Wolverton v. Bruce, 6 Ind. Ter. 135, 89 S. W. 1018 (not to compete with promisee); Atchison, etc., R. Co. v. English, 38 Kans. 110, 16 Pac. 82 (to give railroad pass annually for life); Pierson v. Kingman Milling Co., 91 Kans. 775, 139 Pac. 394, 92 Kans. 468, 140 Pac. 1033 (to serve for employee's life); Howard's Adm. v. Burgen, 4 Dana, 137 (to board for life); Bull v. McCrea, 8 B. Mon. 422 (to support for life); Myles v. Myles, 6 Bush, 237 (to leave property by will); Stowers v. Hollis, 83 Ky. 544 (to support for life); Dickey v. Dickinson, 105 Ky. 748, 49 S. W. 761 (not to compete with promisee); Thomas v. Feese, 21 Ky. L. Rep. 206, 51 S. W. 150 (to serve for employer's life in consideration of promise to will property); McDaniel v. Hutcherson, 136 Ky. 412, 124 S. W. 384 (to furnish a house for promisor's life and leave property by will); Waggener v. Howsley, 164 Ky. 113, 175 S. W. 4 (to pay $10 a month for life); 42 Springfield Ins. Co. v. De Jarnett, 111 Ala. 248, 19 So. 995 (fire); Mattingly v. Springfield Ins. Co., 120 Ky. 768, 83 S. W. 577 (fire); Sanford v. Orient Ins. Co., 174 Mass. 416, 54 N. E. 883 (fire); Wiebeler v. Milwaukee Ins. Co., 30 Minn. 464, 16 N. W. 363 (fire); Trustees v. Brooklyn Fire Ins. Co., 19 N. Y. 305, 28 N. Y. 153 (fire); International Ferry Co. v. American Fidelity Co., 207 N. Y. 350, 101 N. E. 160 (marine liability). But a contract for placing insurance on vessels during two years is within the statute. Johnson v. Harper Transp. Co., 244 Fed. 936, 157 C. C. A. 286. Cf. Struzewski v. Farmers' F. Ins. Co., 179 N. Y. App. D. 318, 166 N. Y. S. 362. 43 Peter v. Compton, Skinner, 353. See also Hughes v. Frum, 41 W. Va. 445, 23 S. E. 604. 44 Ridley v. Ridley, 34 Beav. 478 (to leave property by will); McGre on the death of a specified person, 45 since death may occur within the year. Nor is a promise obnoxious to the statute which is performable at or until the happening of any specified contingency which may or may not occur within a year." 46 A Hutchinson v. Hutchinson, 46 Me. 154 (to pay money during the life of another); Lyon v. King, 11 Metc. (Mass.) 411, 45 Am. Dec. 219 (not to compete with promisee); Worthy v. Jones, 11 Gray, 168, 71 Am. Dec. 696 (not to compete); Lyman v. Lyman, 133 Mass. 414 (to support for life); Wellington v. Apthorp, 145 Mass. 69, 13 N. E. 10 (to leave property by will); Carnig v. Carr, 167 Mass. 544, 46 N. E. 117, 35 L. R. A. 512 (permanent employment); Lavoie v. Dube, 229 Mass. 87, 118 N. E. 179 (to support for life); Carr v. McCarty, 70 Mich. 258, 38 N. W. 241 (to support for life); Smalley v. Mitchell, 110 Mich. 650, 68 N. W. 978 (to serve for employer's life); Boggs v. Pacific Laundry Co., 86 Mo. App. 616 (to serve for employee's life); McCormick v. Drummett, 9 Neb. 384, 2 N. W. 729 (to support for life in consideration of the use of promisee's land for life); Blanding v. Sargent, 33 N. H. 239, 66 Am. Dec. 720 (not to compete); Updike v. Ten Broeck, 32 N. J. L. 105 (to serve for employer's life); Eiserman v. Schneider, 60 N. J. L. 291, 37 Atl. 623 (to support for life); Kent v. Kent, 62 N. Y. 560, 20 Am. Rep. 502 (to serve for employer's life); Dresser v. Dresser, 35 Barb. 573 (to support for life); Thorp v. Stewart, 44 Hun, 232 (to support for life); Richardson v. Pierce, 7 R. I. 330 (not to compete); Zanturjian v. Boornazian, 25 R. I. 151, 154, 55 Atl. 199 (not to compete with promisee); East Line Co. v. Scott, 72 Tex. 70, 10 S. W. 99, 13 Am. St. Rep. 753 (to serve for employee's life); Tipton v. Tipton, 55 Tex. Civ. App. 192, 118 S. W. 842 (to give share of crops for promisee's life); Blanchard v. Weeks, 34 Vt. 589 (not to compete with promisee); Thomas v. Armstrong, 86 Va. 323, 10 S. E. 6, 5 L. R. A. 529 (to serve for life in consideration of promise to leave property by will); Heath v. Heath, 31 Wis. 223 (to support a third person for life); Spencer v. Spencer, 23 Manitoba, 461 (to support a third person for life). But see contra, Vose v. Strong, 45 Ill. App. 98 (to manage a business during the owner's life); affd. on other grounds in 144 Ill. 108, 33 N. E. 189; Chenoweth v. Pacific Express Co., 93 Mo. App. 185, 190 (to make monthly payments during promisee's life); Deaton v. Tennessee Coal Co., 12 Heisk. 650 (promise performable within a year if a mother and her children all died within the period). It should be observed with reference to such of the above decisions as relate to contracts to leave property by will, that a contract to devise real estate falls within another clause of the statute (see supra, § 488), and in some States any contract to make a will is required by statute to be in writing. 45 Frost v. Tarr, 53 Ind. 390; Riddle v. Backus, 38 Ia. 81; Heery v. Reed, 80 Kans. 380, 102 Pac. 846; McDaniel v. Hutcherson, 136 Ky. 412, 124 S. W. 384; Sword v. Keith, 31 Mich. 247; Jilson v. Gilbert, 26 Wis. 637, 7 Am. Rep. 100. 46 Anon. Salk. 280 (on the completion of a voyage); Lavalette v. Riches, 24 T. L. Rep. 336 (on the sale of a patent); Young Men's Christian Assoc. v. Estill, 140 Ga. 291, 78 S. E. 1075 (as soon as work begins on a projected structure); McConahey v. Griffey, 82 Ia. 564, 48 N. W. 983 (when the promisor regained his health); Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Offut, 99 Ky. 427, 36 S. W. 181, 59 Am. St. Rep. 467 (as long as he does faithful and honest |