The correct answer is B. A three-year lease falls within the class of agreements that ordinarily requires sufficient written evidence under the Statute of Frauds. An oral agree ment calling for a three-year lease therefore generally cannot be enforced as a three-year term in the same manner as a properly documented written lease, absent some applicable legal exception.

The important distinction is between void and unenforceable. A Statute of Frauds problem does not necessarily mean that no relationship or legal rights can ever arise. For example, occupancy and acceptance of rent can potentially create another form of tenancy depending on the circumstances. But the originally asserted three-year term ordinarily cannot simply be enforced on the basis of an oral promise.

Massachusetts Board contract curriculum requires candidates to understand the Statute of Frauds, leases, contract validity classifications, and the distinction between oral and written agreements. It also specifically recognizes that some brokerage listing agreements can be oral—a separate rule that should not be confused with a multi-year lease.

Study Guide Reference: Contracts — Statute of Frauds; Leases; Enforceable versus Unenforceable Agreements.