Steve orally agrees, at a family reunion picnic, to buy Bob's farm for $250,000, and all the terms of the agreement are settled. Bob agrees to let Steve come onto the property before the closing date so that Steve can renovate the farmhouse kitchen and build a new barn before he takes over formally. By the time Bob tells Steve that he has changed his mind and that he will not be completing the transaction on the closing date, Steve has spent $40,000 on the property. Steve can ask a court to order specific performance of the contract because he has spent a lot of money on the property. Because of the Statute of Frauds, Steve cannot get the farm, but he can sue Bob for the tort of deceit and recover the $40,000. Under the doctrine of part performance, Steve can request that the court order specific performance of the contract. Steve can use the doctrine of promissory estoppel to foree Bob to complete the transaction and give him the farm in exchange for $250,000 Steve can ask a court to order specific performance of the contract because he has spent a lot of money on the property. Because of the Statute of Frauds, Steve cannot get the farm, but he can sue Bob for the tort of deceit and recover the $40,000. Under the doctrine of part performance, Stere can request that the court order specific performance of the contract. 5 Stere can use the doctrine of promissory estoppel to force Bob to complete the transaction and give him the farm in exchange for $250,000 Under the Statute of Frauds, since their agreement was not evidenced in writing, Steve cannot enforce it in court, and cannot recover the $40,000