court erred by failin court’s instruction that contracts of an indefinite duration are terminable at will, it cites Jefferson Smurfit Corp. v. Hopkins, 49 Ark.App. 18, 894 S.W.2d 951, 952 (1995), for the proposition that where there is an issue of fact as to whether an oral agreement contains a reasonable duration, it is inappropriate .for the court to find as a matter of law that a contract is terminable at will. We agree. Thus, when it is unclear from the record that a contract is for an indefinite duration, “[wjhether justification exists for termination of the contract under the facts and circumstances of a particular case is usually a question of fact.” Joshua v. McBride, 19 Ark.App. 31, 716 S.W.2d 215, 218 (1986) (citation omitted); see also Gary Braswell, 773 F.2d at 989 (<HOLDING>) (citing Griffin v. Erickson, 277 Ark. 433, 642
holding that where an oral contract was removed from the statute of frauds by clear and convincing evidence under arkansas law the defendant could not terminate the contract at its will only a contract of indefinite duration may be so terminated  holding that the statute of frauds bars a breach of contract claim based on an oral agreement to enter a future employment contract that would need to meet the statute of frauds holding that to establish an exception to the statute of frauds it must first be shown that an agreement to convey was actually reached that an oral contract must be established by clear and convincing evidence and that the chapter 7 trustee failed to establish that there was any parol contract for conveyance of property from debtors parents to the debtor holding that a contract of an indefinite duration is terminable at will holding that an employment contract of an indefinite duration is terminable at will