If there is a contract to be performed two years from now for one minute would that fall under Statute of Fraud? What I'm asking is does the act have to be over a year to perform or does it have to be a year from the date the contract was drafted?

rephrase / explain

I'll do my best.

A contract is protected by the statue of Fraud under certain circumstances
- Marriage (pre-nups and such)
- any task that that cannot be performed[/b] within a year
- Lease agreements over 1 yr (in NYS) and land transfers
- Executor and surety
- Goods and services over $500 (in NYS)
- Others depending on your state

unless it is
- Written and
- Includes all material terms and
- is signed by both parties

For example:
If I signed a two year lease agreement and the contract was written, material, and signed by both parties it would not be voidable under the statute of fraud.

However if I signed a two year lease agreement and the contract was written, signed, but not including all the important terms of the lease than it would be voidable under statue of fraud.

Now, certain things differ from state to state but I'm confused about a universal principle.

Question:
The words "a task that [i]cannot be performed within a year[/b]" are taken exactly from law. But what does that mean? Consider the following situation:

I sign a contract with InerComputers Company on October 15th 2008. The terms of this contract state that two years from now I will come in to the company store and fix computers for 30 minutes.

Now the task itself only takes 30 minutes, but the entire contract is two years and 30 minutes. So could that task been performed within a year? Because if I had an entire year to fix computers I could definitely do it for thirty minutes. But at the same time it hasn't been performed within [i]a year of contraction.

???

Killing yourself in English grammar in legislation? :D

"Any task that cannot be performed within a year."

This refers to tasks that take more then 1 year to complete. This has to do with employment services and makes it necesary for an employer and an employee to sign a written contract if the employee is expected to work for longer then 1 year.

Employment shorter then 1 year arent deemed contract employments, thats more like someone hires someone else to do something for him.

2 Examples:

1. A private individual wants his house painted and hires another private individual to do this for him/her. The work is expected to take three weeks. Both parties come to terms about the fee, time, etc. This does not require a contract as specified by Statue of Fraud.

2. McDonalds hires a new employee to keep the place tidy. He/she is expected to work for atleast 2 years, then his/her contract can be lengthened. This will require a contract.

I understand those two examples. But does the 1 year start from the time of contraction or from the time the task begun? Say I signed a contract that required me to work one hour but two years from now. Could that be performed within a year?

Yes, since its a contract.

Yes, since its a contract.

I may not be explaining the question right.

I talked to a friends dad who does contract law and the answer to my question is no. The terms of the contract must not be able to be performed within a year in order for such contract to fall under the statute of fraud, regardless of whether the contract is executed within a years period.

So that would mean:
If I signed a contract that required me to do one hour of work in 2012 it would not fall under the statute of fraud because the terms of the contract are not over a year, regardless of the fact that the contract won't be executed until four years from now.

I may not be explaining the question right.

I talked to a friends dad who does contract law and the answer to my question is no. The terms of the contract must not be able to be performed within a year in order for such contract to fall under the statute of fraud, regardless of whether the contract is executed within a years period.

So that would mean:
If I signed a contract that required me to do one hour of work in 2012 it would not fall under the statute of fraud because the terms of the contract are not over a year, regardless of the fact that the contract won't be executed until four years from now.
I disagree. My understanding is the year begins when the contract is created and ends when both parties have fully performed.

"Please note that the fact that a contract is not completed within one year does not mean that it is voidable under a statute of frauds. For the statute to apply, the actual terms of the contract must make it impossible for performance to be completed within one year"

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/business/statute_of_frauds.html

"Please note that the fact that a contract is not completed within one year does not mean that it is voidable under a statute of frauds. For the statute to apply, the actual terms of the contract must make it impossible for performance to be completed within one year"

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/business/statute_of_frauds.html
Right. If the terms state that the work will begin one year in the future, then it is impossible for performance to be completed within one year.