Source: https://chestofbooks.com/business/law/Handbook-Law-Of-Contracts/Contracts-For-Work-Labor-And-Materials.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 05:20:08+00:00

Document:
A difficult question has arisen where labor has to be expended on the thing sold before the contract is executed, and the property transferred, as to whether the contract is for the sale of goods within the seventeenth section, or for work and labor, and therefore enforceable if to be performed within a year, so as not to be within the fourth section. The decisions on this question are not in accord.
In some states it is held that a contract for the sale of something which the seller ordinarily makes and sells in the course of his business is a contract for the sale of goods, and not for work and labor, though he may not have the goods on hand, but may have to manufacture them; but, if the goods are not such as he ordinarily makes, and have to be specially manufactured for the buyer, the contract is for work and labor.1* This is commonly called the Massachusetts rule and has been so generally adopted that it is sometimes referred to as the American rule.
10 Baldey v. Parker, 2 Barn. & C. 37. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 85; Cent. Dig. § 141.
11 Lee v. Griffin, 1 Best & S. 272. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 88; Cent. Dig. §§ 147-153.
12 Pratt v. Miller, 109 Mo. 78, 18 S. W. 965, 32 Am. St. Rep. 656; Burrell v. Highleyman, 33 Mo. App. 183. See "Frauds, Statute of," Deo. Dig. (Key-No.) § 83; Cent. Dig. §§ 147-158.
13 See cases cited post, notes 14, 15.

References: v. 
 § 85
 § 141
 v. 
 § 88
 v. 
 v. 
 § 83