sale of real estate exists is usually a question for the trier of fact. See Hamad v. Manuel, 26 Mass.App.Ct. 966, 967 (1988); Nelson v. Rebello, 26 Mass.App.Ct. 270, 272 (1988); Kinchla v. Welch, 8 Mass.App.Ct. 367, 370 (1979). Absent any dispute of material fact, however, the court may rule on the case as a matter of law. See Blomendale v. Imbrescia, 25 Mass.App.Ct. 144, 144 (1987). Albrecht’s Contract Claims are Barred by the Statute of Frauds For an agreement for the purchase and sale of real estate to be enforceable, it must be written and signed by the parties. See Arthur L. Eno, Jr. and William V. Hovey, Real Estate Law §3.1, at 24 (3rd ed. 1995), citing G.L.c. 259, §1, the Massachusetts Statute of Frauds. See also, Schwarnbeck v. Federal-Mogul Corp., 412 Mass. 703, 709 (1992) (<HOLDING>). The Statute of Frauds allows parties to
holding that a settlement agreement in which the plaintiff agreed to drop all claims against the defendants in exchange for a specific sum of money was enforceable despite the fact that the agreement did not specify whether the plaintiffs promise would take the legal form of a release or a covenant not to sue holding that a tax appeal on real property is a lien on the real estate and not a personal obligation of the landowner holding that any promise involving real property is enforceable only if that promise meets the requirements of the statute holding that promissory estoppel existed when the grantor agreed to use the property for only residential purposes took title with knowledge of that promise and the grantee relied upon that agreement holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property