Phung orally agreed to sell a thoroughbred horse to Presti for $60,000. When Presti sent a check in payment, Phung told him that he intended to hold the check for a month for tax purposes. Phung retained possession of the horse. While the check remained uncashed, a disagreement arose between Phung and Presti. Phung announced that he would not go through with the transaction and that, because the contract was oral, it was unenforceable. Presti claimed that his sending the check was payment and this action made the oral contract valid and enforceable. Phung denied accepting payment. Is Presti's claim that that sending the check made the contract enforceable, valid?