< img src="https://assets.inman.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/MURDOCK-1860x1046-2026-06-02T112106.674-1024x576.jpg"alt =""> A written-communication protocol is a professionalism signal that helps you stand out, attorney Kelly Lise Murray writes. Carry out these 5 simple fixes to keep your e-mails and texts contractless.
The buyer texted, “Glad we might reach an agreement.” The home builder’s bro responded, “Me too …”
These 8 words required a $2.8 million luxury home saleback in Perl v. Grant. In 2024, the Montana Supreme Court held that several casual texts about disputed building and construction costs pleased the statute of frauds and made up an enforceable agreement, displacing the buyers combating to keep the home.
The Perl dissenting justices, nevertheless, emphasized that the home builder’s bro was simply a “consultant” who lacked binding authority.
After the 2024 National Association of Realtors commission settlement removed settlement offers from the MLS, the Perl result cut much deeper. Buyer-agent settlement now moves through e-mail and text, in addition to concessions and other product terms. Do such electronic communications form enforceable agreements?
Why previous protections are vanishing
Under California’s statute of scams, texts are insufficient for real estate agreement formation absent composed confirmation. However courts in other states have actually held that e-mails and texts can form enforceable contracts under the statute of frauds and contract doctrine. Three recurring factual spaces previously prevented contract formation, as Massachusetts and Florida cases highlight.
In St. John’s Holdings v. 2 Electronic Devices, the 2016 Massachusetts Land Court held that a broker’s given name, typed at the end of a text message, satisfied the signature requirement under the state statute of scams. The seller later won on appeal in 2017 due to the fact that the broker lacked binding authority.
In Walsh v. Abate, a 2022 Florida appellate court held that unsigned electronic messages between representatives for a home seller and prospective buyer “accepting” a sale price offer stopped working under the statute of scams. The seller’s agent texted that the seller would “accept the $3.4 million,” and the purchaser’s agent texted back, “Perfect and verified. Thank you!” The seller’s representative even emailed that the seller “thanks him for his patience and accepts $3.4 million.”
Days later on, the seller accepted a various deal. Due to the fact that no written agreement had actually been signed by both celebrations, the court affirmed on appeal that these electronic messages were settlements that bound no one. However, they did set off expensive lawsuits.
Since the NAR settlement, these contract-preventing factual gaps are vanishing:
- Product terms missing: Previously, electronic messages typically lacked cost, closing date or residential or commercial property description, but agents now negotiate material terms over email or text.
- No signature: Numerous electronic messages previously had no typed name. However, the UETA (Uniform Electronic Transactions Act) treats typed names as electronic signatures, and representatives now routinely sign emails and texts electronically.
- No authority to bind principals: Basic listing contracts license brokers to market the home, not to contract on sellers’ behalf, however agents regularly interact directly with unrepresented principals such as FSBO sellers or unrepresented buyers.
5 safeguards for every single text and email
Each of these safeguards is a small modification in digital habits. Every one targets an agreement component that mention courts commonly analyze (as detailed above) when ruling whether an email or text forms an enforceable property offer. Run all five previous your handling broker this week before using them.
- Utilize a non-binding disclaimer in substantive messages. The North Carolina Realty Commission (in its 2021 eBulletin, “A Broker’s Email Might Prove BINDING!”) advised brokers to state, “This e-mail or text does not create acceptance or a binding contract.”
- Flag at least one material term as still open. When electronic interaction concerns price or concessions, leave something clearly unsettled: “Closing date, examination contingency, and financing terms still to be exercised.” If even one material term is genuinely uncertain, the agreement usually remains unenforceable.
- Disclaim authority to bind, after confirming the disclaimer is accurate. Verify from the actual listing or buyer-broker agreement that this statement holds true, before adding: “I do not have authority to bind my customer by email or text. All agreements need my client’s written signature.” Requirement and non-standard kinds may resolve this differently from power of lawyer documents.
- Consist of an integration stipulation in the written contract. The 2025-2026 GAR Purchase and Sale Arrangement Section c. 4(f) specifies the contract “will not be considered to have actually been mutually left from or waived other than upon the written contract of the parties.” Ask your managing broker whether similar language exists or is required by unique terms for your state.
- Recognize when the agent-to-agent “buffer” thins or vanishes. Georgia Realtors’ General Counsel Seth Weissman has actually called agent-to-agent texts “nothing more than noise.” That buffer thins in states without similar agreement language and vanishes when the other side of the message is an unrepresented principal, like a FSBO seller or unrepresented buyer. Safeguards one through 4 specifically matter then.
Think about strolling clients through your safeguards in listing and purchaser discussions; a written-communication procedure is a professionalism signal that helps you stick out.
Under the NAR settlement, brokers and agents can not prevent electronic messages about product terms, and three factual spaces that avoided contract development in past prosecuted cases– left out cost or closing date, unsigned message and broker without binding authority– are vanishing.
Before a regular text perhaps forms an agreement you never meant, or activates lawsuits over whether it did, make certain your safeguards are valid in your state before you send out the next one.
Kelly Lise Murray, J.D., is a Harvard-trained lawyer and previous Vanderbilt Law professor. She cofounded VettingTheHouse.com and DivorceThisHouse.com. Get connected on YouTube and LinkedIn.