Does this promise have to be in a signed writing to be enforceable in North Carolina?
For four common categories, yes. N.C.G.S. § 22-1 bars an action charging a defendant 'upon a special promise to answer the debt, default or miscarriage of another person' unless the agreement, or some memorandum or note of it, is in writing and signed by the party charged or by another person lawfully authorized by him; the same section also bars an action charging an executor, administrator or collector 'upon a special promise to answer damages out of his own estate'. N.C.G.S. § 22-2 makes all contracts to sell or convey lands, tenements or hereditaments or any interest in or concerning them, all leases and contracts for leasing land for digging for gold or other minerals or for mining generally of whatever duration, and all other leases and contracts for leasing lands exceeding three years in duration from the making, VOID unless the contract or a memorandum or note of it is put in writing and signed by the party to be charged or by another person lawfully authorized. N.C.G.S. § 22-5 provides that no commercial loan commitment by a bank, savings and loan association or credit union for a loan in excess of fifty thousand dollars is binding unless the commitment is in writing and signed by the party to be bound. And for goods, § 25-2-201(a) provides that 'Except as otherwise provided in this section', a contract for the sale of goods for the price of five hundred dollars or more is not enforceable by way of action or defense unless there is a record sufficient to indicate that a contract for sale has been made between the parties and signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought or by that party's authorized agent or broker, and that the contract is not enforceable under that subsection beyond the quantity of goods shown in the record.
The trap
The four sections do not fail the same way and do not have the same exceptions. Section 22-2 says such a contract is VOID, while § 22-1 says no action may be brought and § 25-2-201 says the contract is 'not enforceable by way of action or defense'. Read § 25-2-201's opening words before relying on subsection (a) at all: it applies only 'Except as otherwise provided in this section', and the section goes on to provide four escapes that § 22-1 and § 22-2 do not have, one in subsection (b) and three numbered in subsection (c). Subsection (b) is the merchant confirmation rule: between merchants, a record in confirmation of the contract and sufficient against the sender, received within a reasonable time by a party who has reason to know its contents, satisfies subsection (a) against that party unless notice in a record of objection to its contents is given within 10 days after it is received. Subsection (c) then applies to a contract that fails subsection (a) 'but that is valid in other respects', and makes it enforceable in three cases: (1) specially manufactured goods not suitable for sale to others in the ordinary course of the seller's business, where the seller has made a substantial beginning of their manufacture or commitments for their procurement before notice of repudiation is received; (2) where the party against which enforcement is sought admits in its pleading, testimony or otherwise in court that a contract for sale was made, though not beyond the quantity of goods admitted; and (3) goods for which payment has been made and accepted or that have been received and accepted. Section 22-5 defines its own subject: a 'commercial loan commitment' is an offer, agreement, commitment or contract to extend credit primarily for business or commercial purposes and does NOT include charge or credit card accounts, personal lines of credit, overdrafts or any other consumer account, and offers, agreements, commitments or contracts to extend credit primarily for aquaculture, agricultural or farming purposes are specifically exempted from the section. Section 22-2's three-year rule is about DURATION FROM THE MAKING, not the remaining term, and its mining-lease limb bites 'of whatever duration'. Sections 22-1 and 22-2 as read contain no exception, proviso or escape of any kind, so any way out of those two comes from somewhere other than their text. NOT ESTABLISHED HERE: whether part performance takes a land contract out of § 22-2 in North Carolina, and whether a 'no oral modification' clause is enforceable (no decision on either was read, and North Carolina decisions mentioning §§ 22-1, 22-2, 22-5 and 25-2-201 do exist and were not read here) as do 91 North Carolina decisions that use the phrase 'part performance', the most recent of them a 2023 decision of the Supreme Court of North Carolina. On the statutory side the phrase 'part performance' appears in exactly one published North Carolina section, § 25-2-718, which is about liquidated damages and deposits rather than land, so if part performance takes a land contract out of § 22-2 it does so as a judge-made doctrine and not by anything in the statutes.
8 authorities
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 22-1enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
No action shall be brought whereby to charge an executor, administrator or collector upon a special promise to answer damages out of his own estate or to charge any defendant upon a special promise to answer the debt, default or miscarriage of another person, unless the agreement upon which such action shall be brought, or some memorandum or note thereof, shall be in writing, and signed by the party charged therewith or some other person thereunto by him lawfully authorized.
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 22-2enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
All contracts to sell or convey any lands, tenements or hereditaments, or any interest in or concerning them, and all leases and contracts for leasing land for the purpose of digging for gold or other minerals, or for mining generally, of whatever duration; and all other leases and contracts for leasing lands exceeding in duration three years from the making thereof, shall be void unless said contract, or some memorandum or note thereof, be put in writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith, or by some other person by him thereto lawfully authorized.
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 22-5enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
No commercial loan commitment by a bank, savings and loan association, or credit union for a loan in excess of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) shall be binding unless the commitment is in writing and signed by the party to be bound.
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 25-2-201enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a contract for the sale of goods for the price of five hundred dollars ($500.00) or more is not enforceable by way of action or defense unless there is a record sufficient to indicate that a contract for sale has been made between the parties and signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought or by the party's authorized agent or broker. A record is not insufficient because it omits or incorrectly states a term agreed upon but the contract is not enforceable under this subsection beyond the quantity of goods shown in the record.
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 25-2-201enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
(b) Between merchants, if within a reasonable time a record in confirmation of the contract and sufficient against the sender is received and the party receiving it has reason to know its contents, the record satisfies the requirements of subsection (a) of this section against the party unless notice in a record of objection to its contents is given within 10 days after it is received.
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 25-2-201enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
(c) All of the following apply to a contract that does not satisfy the requirements of subsection (a) of this section but that is valid in other respects: (1) The contract is enforceable if the goods are to be specially manufactured for the buyer and are not suitable for sale to others in the ordinary course of the seller's business and the seller, before notice of repudiation is received and under circumstances that reasonably indicate that the goods are for the buyer, has made either a substantial beginning of their manufacture or commitments for their procurement.
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 25-2-201enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
(2) The contract is enforceable if the party against which enforcement is sought admits in the party's pleading, testimony, or otherwise in court that a contract for sale was made, but the contract is not enforceable under this subdivision beyond the quantity of goods admitted. (3) The contract is enforceable with respect to goods for which payment has been made and accepted or that have been received and accepted (G.S. 25-2-606).
- statuteN.C.G.S. § 22-5enactment date not established
The words that state the rule
As used in this section, the term "commercial loan commitment" means an offer, agreement, commitment, or contract to extend credit primarily for business or commercial purposes and does not include charge or credit card accounts, personal lines of credit, overdrafts, or any other consumer account. Offers, agreements, commitments, or contracts to extend credit primarily for aquaculture, agricultural, or farming purposes are specifically exempted from the provisions of this section.
“Defective” means that reading found something to correct. What you are reading is the rule as it stands after that reading.