Does the statute of fraud apply to an oral out-of-court settlement?

In Hastings v. Matlock (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 826, 217 Cal.Rptr. 856, the parties entered into an oral out-of-court settlement of an action involving a breach of contract for sale of real property. The settlement agreement provided for plaintiffs to pay defendants the costs of improvements defendants had made to the property while in possession of the real property and for rescission of the contract for sale. The court held that the statute of frauds was not applicable, because the agreement only contemplated payment of the costs of improvements and rescission of the contract of sale, neither of which need be in writing to be enforceable. (Id. at pp. 836-837, 217 Cal.Rptr. 856.) The oral settlement agreement was found to be enforceable.

In Kreling v. Walsh (1947) 77 Cal.App.2d 821, 176 P.2d 965, the court found the statute of frauds inapplicable to an oral out-of-court settlement which was subsequently embodied in a signed written contract and thereafter executed.