Case Name: RICHARD H. PRANT AND HEATHER G. PRANT, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. PAUL STERLING AND FLEET BANK, N.A., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS
Court: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 2000-06-20
Citations: 332 N.J. Super. 292
Docket Number: 
Parties: RICHARD H. PRANT AND HEATHER G. PRANT, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. PAUL STERLING AND FLEET BANK, N.A., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Superior Court Reports
Volume: 332
Pages: 292–293

Head Matter:
753 A.2d 715
RICHARD H. PRANT AND HEATHER G. PRANT, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. PAUL STERLING AND FLEET BANK, N.A., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
Argued April 12, 2000
Decided June 20, 2000.
Before Judges KESTIN, WEFING and STEINBERG.
Lawrence P. Cohen, argued the cause for appellants (Courier, Robert, Laufer & Cohen, attorneys; Mr. Cohen, of counsel and on the brief).
William D. Grand, argued the cause for respondents (Greenbourn, Rowe, Smith, Ravin, Davis & Himmel, attorneys; Mr. Grand, of counsel and on the brief).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiffs appeal from the trial court's order dismissing the complaint on defendants' motion for summary judgment. On April 30, 1999, Judge Herr rendered an oral opinion disposing of the matter based upon her interpretation and application of L. 1995, C. 360, § 4, which had amended the Statute of Frauds to provide, inter alia:
An agreement to transfer an interest in real estate or to hold an interest in real estate for the benefit of another shall not be enforceable unless:
^ ^ $
b. a description of the real estate sufficient to identify it, the nature of the interest to be transferred, the existence of the agreement and the identity of the transferor and the transferee are proved by clear and convincing evidence.
[N.J.S.A. 25:1-13.]
By reason of this provision, the acquisition of an interest in land may be established by parol evidence for the first time in modern history.
Judge Herr's oral opinion has since been formalized and is reported at 332 N.J.Super. 369, 753 A.2d 758. After reviewing the record in the light of the written and oral arguments advanced by the parties, we are in substantial agreement with the decisional rationale employed by Judge Herr and affirm on that basis.
Affirmed.