Is an e-mailed residential agreement legally binding?

Our landlord has just informed us that she is selling her property.  We have a 3-year lease agreement.  We know that the new buyer is supposed to honor this lease.  Now she says, "well, actually, we never signed this agreement."  I saved all the e-mails between us and said, "if we can do this by email, consider this signed."  She also agreed to the agreement via e-mail and even pro... her bank information so that I could deposit our rent which she has accepted for the past few months.  Is this agreement legally binding?

You don't have to sign a contract to have a contract.

Electronic contracts have been well recognized in court for years.

That she wrote "consider this signed" gives it all the strength (in my opinion) of a written signed contract.

That she accepted rent under that agreement is "performance" and gives added strength to the terms of the contract.

I suggest that it would be worth your while to spend a few hundred to have a lawyer write you up a written opinion about the validity of your contract, providing statutory and case citations, that you can send to your landlord and give to any prospective buyer that comes to look at the house so that you make sure that the prospective buyer knows that you will hold them to the lease and that you have a lawyer that you are obviously willing to use.

I agree 2/3 way--but my view doesn't count for much:

1. Sure reads like you have an executed 3 year lease.

2.Sure makes sesne to me to confirm status with counsel of your choice.

3. Personally I see NO advantage to tell either LL or prospective buyer as to your views of lease as reviewed by your  counsel any time too soon.  If you tell her too soon she may go to work to try to undermine your stance. Why tell her?

You need an opinon from a Hawaii lawyer; none participate here so far as I know. Virtually every state has a version of the old English statute of frauds, which required that certain contracts be in writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought (i.e. the landlord here). Contracts for interests in land and contracts in which full performance cannot be rendered in less than a year are within the statute of frauds and generally must meet the requirement I mentioned. While e-mail may be considered a writing, you have a problem with the signature requirement. There are certain ways to sign electronic documents that that law the recognizes, and this varies by state. But simply stating "consider this signed" is not one of them in any state I'm familiar with. There are also some exceptions to the statute of frauds that might get you around the requirement of a writing. Full performance by one side is one of them in many states; but there has been no full performance of this contract yet. Whether partial performance may do it will depend on HI law. The bottom line here is that the answer is very much dependent on the specifics of Hawaii's version of the statute of frauds and on it's law on electronic documents. See a local real estate attorney for advice on this one.

Actually its even more complex--the contract could consist of multiple writings --only one of which needs to be signed--but taxagent has a killer point--lack of signature could be deadly under statute of frauds. . Now the email that says consider this signed sure sounds like equivalent of signature in English and make it clear person intends to be bound and should be prevented from benefit of own error  --but the legal details of same are much beter addressed to HI contracts or RE counsel.

Drew:

Now the email that says consider this signed sure sounds like equivalent of signature in English and make it clear person intends to be bound and should be prevented from benefit of own error

The problem is that e-mail is generally looked upon the same as a document on paper. That is, if you printed it out on paper, would it meet the requirement for a writing? On a regular contract on paper, a statement typed on the document that says "this statement is equilvalent to a signature" would not suffice for the signature requirement. Rather, as you might expect, the actual signature of the party is needed. The same is true then for e-mail; a signature of some kind is still needed. There are various ways to accomplish that for electronic documents, and as I said before, that varies from state to state. But no state I know would say a simple statement like "this statement is equilvalent to a signature" would cut it. But the poster needs advice of a HI lawyer since it is very much an issue of HI state law.

Well I see your point entirely--and HI case law may be critical---

but I still think makers intent is clear--and a broad definition of electronic signature at laylevel includes anything that is intended as a signature--and to extent that maker created the ambiguity I would think maker cannot benefit from own error  and other side gets benefit of doubt.....but I agree if the words are a hair short of what some HI courts holds to be signature or ite equivalnet the poster is up the creek.

A couple of scratch marks may count as a signature --and court may consider a statement like "consider it signed " as to be clear indication of makers intent...

My guess is its both waht  HI laws say on point as to electronic signatures and the skills of posters counsel. Owner may be reluctant to test the points if you spring them at a critical time!