An elderly widower lived alone on a small farm, which he owned. except for the farm, including the house and its furnishings, and the usual items of personal clothing and similar things, the widower owned substantially no property. under proper management, the farm was capable of producing adequate family income. because the usual deterioration accompanying old age, the widower was unable to do farm work or even provide for his own personal needs. the widower entered into an oral contract with his nephew by which the widower agreed to convey the farm to his nephew and his nephew agreed to move into the house with the widower, operate the farm, and take care of the widower for the rest of his life. the oral contract was silent as to when the land was to be conveyed. the nephew, who lived about 50 miles away where he was operating a small business of his own, terminated his business and moved in with the widower. with the assistance of his wife, the nephew gave the widower excellent care until the widower died intestate about five years after the fate of the contract. in his final years the widower was confined to his bed and required much personal service of an intimate and arduous sort. the widower was survived by his only son, who was also the widower's sole heir and next of kin. the son resided in a distant city and gave his father no attention in his father's final years. the son showed up for the widower's funeral and demanded that the nephew vacate the farm immediately. upon the nephew's refusal to do so, the widower's son brought an appropriate action for possession. the nephew answered by way of counterclaim to establish his right to possession and title to the farm.
if the court's decision is in favor of the nephew, it will be because(a) the land is located in a state where the sof will not be applied if there has been such part performance as will result in an irreparable hardship if the contract is not performed.
(b) the land is located in a state where the sof will not be applied if there has been such part performance that is by its very nature unequivocally referable to the contract.
(c) the brother is precluded by the "clean hands" doctrine from enforcing his claim against the nephew.
(d) the blood relationship of uncle-nephew is sufficient to remove the necessity for any writing to satisfy the sof.