82 Kent v. Kent, 62 N. Y. 560, 20 Am. Rep. 502; Heath v. Heath, 31 Wis. 223; Carr v. McCarthy, 70 Mich. 258, 38 N. W. 241; Bell v. Hewitt's Ex'rs, 24 Ind. 2S0; Harper v. Harper, 57 Ind. 547; McGregor v. McGregor, L. R. 21 Q. B. Div. 424; Dresser v. Dresser, 35 Barb. (N. Y.) 573; Hutchinson v. Hutchinson, 46 Me. 154; Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. English, 38 Kan. 110, 16 Pac. 82; East Line & R. R. R. Co. v. Scott, 71 Tex. 703, 10 S. W. 298, 10 Am. St Rep. 804; Stowers v. Hollis, 83 Ky. 544; Dailey v. Cain (Ky.) 13 S. W. 424. Nor is an agreement to work for a company "for the term of five years, or so long as A. shall continue to be agent for the company." Roberts v. Rockbottom Co., 7 Mete. (Mass.) 46. Nor an agreement to employ a person so long as he may be disabled from an injury which he has received. East Tennessee, V. & G. R. Co. v. Staub, 7 Lea (Tenn.) 397. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 49-52; Cent. Dig. §§ 74-79.

83 First Baptist Church v. Insurance Co., 19 N. Y. 305; Roberts v. Rock-bottom Co., 7 Metc. (Mass.) 46; Walker v. Railroad Co., 26 S. C. 80, 1 S. E. 366; Blake v. Voight, 11 N. Y. Supp. 716; Id., 134 N. Y. 69, 31 N. E. 256, 30 Am. St. Rep. 622; Johnston v. Bowersock, 62 Kan. 148, 61 Pac. 740. Contra: Dobson v. Collis, 1 H. & N. 81; Biest v. Shoe Co., 97 Mo. 137, 70 S. W. 1081. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 49-52; Cent. Dig. §§ 74-79.

84 An agreement by a railroad company to maintain cattle guards in consideration of a right of way is not within the statute, since it may cease to use the right of way before expiration of a year. Arkansas M. R. Co. v. Whitley, 54 Ark. 199, 15 S. W. 465, 11 L. R. A. 621. A parol contract of partnership, without any fixed time for continuance, and the business of which may be completed within a year, is not within the statute. Jordan v. Miller, 75 Va. 442; Treat v. Hiles, 68 Wis. 344, 32 N. W. 517, 60 Am. Rep. 858. It is otherwise if the partnersbip is to be continued beyond a year. Wahl v. Barnum, 116 N. Y. 87, 22 N. E. 280, 5 L. R. A. 623. And see, on the rule stated in the text, Frazer v. Gates, 118 111. 99, 1 N. E. 817; Dailey v. Cain (Ky.) 13 S. W. 424; Great Western Turnpike Co. v. Shafer, 57 App. Div. 331, 68 N. Y. Supp. 8. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) i 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 75-77.

85 Under this rule it has been repeatedly held that an agreement not to carry on a certain business at a particular place was not within the statute, "because, being only a personal engagement to forbear doing certain acts, not stipulating for anything beyond the promisor's life, and imposing no duties upon his personal representatives, it would be fully performed if he died within the year." DOYLE v. DIXON, 97 Mass. 208, 93 Am. Dec. 80, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 72; Lyon v. King, 11 Mete (Mass.) 411, 45 Am. Dec.

Clark Cont.(3d Ed.) - 7

219; Worthy v. Jones, 11 Gray (Mass.) 168, 71 Am. Dec. 696; Hill v. Jamieson, 16 Ind. 125, 79 Am. Dec. 414; Richardson v. Pierce, 7 R. I. 330. And it immaterial in such cases that the agreement specifies that the promisor is to forbear for a certain number of years. DOYLE v. DIXON, supra. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 75-77.

86 Peters v. Westborough, 19 Pick. (Mass.) 364, 31 Am. Dec. 142; Ellicott v. Turner, 4 Md. 476; Wooldridge v. Stern (C. C.) 42 Fed. 311, 9 L. R. A. 129; Taylor v. Deseve, 81 Tex. 246, 16 S. W. 1008. See, also, Pennsylvania Co. v. Dolan, 6 Ind. App. 109, 32 N. E. 802, 51 Am. St. Rep. 289; Carnig v. Carr, 167 Mass. 544, 46 N. E. 117, 35 L. R. A. 512, 57 Am. St. Rep. 488; Yellow Poplar Lumber Co. v. Rule, 106 Ky. 455, 50 S. W. 685; Sax v. Railway Co., 125 Mich. 252, 84 N. W. 314, 84 Am. St. Rep. 572; Martin v. Batchelder, 69 N. H. 360, 41 Atl. 83 (to keep house for year). See "Frauds, Statute of" Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 75-77.

87 DOYLE v. DIXON, supra. For this reason it has been held that an Agreement to employ a boy for five years, and to pay his father certain sums at stated periods during that time, was within the statute; for though, by the death of the boy, the services which were the consideration of the promise would cease, and the promise therefore be determined, it would not be completely performed. Hill v. Hooper, 1 Gray (Mass.) 131. And see Washington, A. & G. Steam Packet Co. v. Sickles, 5 Wall. 580, 18 L. Ed. 550 (Cf. Warner v. Railway Co., 164 U. S. 418, 17 Sup. Ct. 147, 41 L. Ed. 495, criticising this case). And so, according to the weight of authority, an agreement for personal services for a period of more than one year is within the statute, for, on the death of either party, it would be terminated, and not fully performed. Williams v. Bemis, 108 Mass. 91, 11 Am. Rep. 318; Lee's Adm'r v. Hill, 87 Va. 497, 12 S. E. 1052, 24 Am. St. Rep. 666; Day v. Railroad Co., 51 N. Y. 583, 590; Haynes v. Mason, 30 111. App. 85; William Butcher Steel Works v. Atkinson, 68 111. 421, 18 Am. Rep. 560; Chase v. Hinkley, 126 Wis. 75, 105 N. W. 230, 2 L. R. A. (N. S.) 738, 110 Am. St. Rep. 896, 5 Ann. Cas. 328. In such cases, where the employe is discharged or quits the employment, after part performance, he may recover for what he has done, not on the contract, but on an implied assumpsit. Cases cited supra; Baker v. Lauterbach, 68 Md. 64, 11 Atl. 703. See, also, post, p. 119. If the term of employment is indefinite, the contract is not within the statute. See, also, Dobson v. Collis, 1 Hurl. & N. 81. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 75-77.

88 Wagniere v. Dunnell, 29 R. I. 580, 73 Atl. 309, 17 Ann. Cas. 205. See "Frauds, Statute of," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 51; Cent. Dig. § 78.

(e) Agreements of which performance may be required within a year if either party so chooses, though neither intends to require performance, and neither in fact requires it, until after expiration of the year.91