Why Must Real Estate Contracts Be in Writing in New Hampshire?

Disputes over land rarely turn on what the parties remember. They turn on what the parties can prove. When an alleged real estate agreement exists only in memory, the risk of mistake - or fabrication - rises sharply. New Hampshire law addresses that risk directly by requiring most real estate contracts to be in writing before a court will enforce them.

The Real Estate Rule: Transfers of Interests in Land

RSA 506:1 requires an agreement transferring an interest in real estate to be in writing and signed by the party to be bound.  Agreements include:

• Purchase and Sale Agreements
• Leases (which transfer a present possessory interest)
• Agreements to assign leasehold interests
• Written modifications of essential terms of existing real estate agreements

In a recent New Hampshire Supreme Court decision, a purchase and sale agreement for a twelve-unit building in Manchester contained a financing contingency with a “time is of the essence” deadline. The buyer did not meet the written financing deadline but the parties continued communicating. They discussed closing in December. They exchanged emails. They scheduled dates.

Then the seller terminated the deal.

The buyer sued for specific performance. The seller argued the buyer had defaulted and the statute of frauds barred the introduction of oral discussions about extending deadlines.

The Supreme Court disagreed and held the seller waived the financing contingency by continuing toward closing and thus lost the right to terminate the agreement.  But even there, the court arrived at its ruling by interpreting the written purchase and sale agreement.

The One-Year Rule

A related but distinct aspect of the statute of frauds is the so-called one-year rule.

RSA 506:2 requires a writing for agreements not capable of being performed within one year.

In a recent non-real estate case, the New Hampshire Supreme Court considered whether an oral $23 million perpetual software license reached during a phone call required a writing to be enforceable.

The dispute turned on whether the agreement could not be performed within one year and therefore had to be in writing. The Court ruled the agreement could be, and in fact was, fully performed within one year, and thus was enforceable.

Even though the license lasted in perpetuity, performance occurred immediately when the licensor released its right to sue the licensee for infringement of its patent rights and associated proprietary technology.

Practical Takeaway for New Hampshire Real Estate

For real estate lawyers, the key takeaway is that most real estate transactions involve either a transfer of a present interest in land or continuing obligations affecting land. Those transactions demand reliable written proof. 

‍ ‍

J&C Properties, LLC v. Rayster Realty, LLC, 2026 N.H. 12; Collision Commc’ns v. Nokia Solutions and Networks OY, 2026 N.H. 4.

For assistance with leases, real estate, contracts and civil litigation, please contact Alfano Law at (603) 856-8411 or by filling out our Contact Form.  The firm offers free or low-cost initial consultations for most matters.