The Fujiis told Nakamura they could not pay their daughter’s tuition at USC and asked him to pay “certain tuition invoices” for her. He orally agreed in exchange for their express promise to repay the money on demand. He issued five checks to USC totaling $40,339 over a 15-month period. A year later the Fujiis made the same request for their younger daughter, and he orally agreed on the same conditions. He issued six checks for her tuition over a three-year period, totaling $60,964. When Nakamura demanded payment, the Fujiis refused to pay, and Nakamura sued them. Will the statute of frauds prevent Nakamura from collecting? Explain.