As more transactions are done by text, new legal issues will follow. Explore these statistics for a moment: as of 2017, 8 trillion texts per day have been sent worldwide. At the end of 2013, six billion text messages were sent every day in the United States alone. Between 2011 and 2014, global use of text increased by 140% in two and a half years. Many people call SMS as the new email because of their speed. In fact, faster, everything means everything in today`s business world, and here SMS has an obvious advantage over emails. In the business world, the advantage of SMS is obvious: read faster, reach faster, no subject line required, more personal and more striking. Since this can apply to emails, text messages, chat windows, social media exchanges, and other types of digital messages, it`s important to clearly state your intentions in your email messages. The ability to create a contract by mistake by simply sending an email is a pretty scary prospect for any business owner. Courts across the country regularly find that an electronic communication has created a valid contract or modified the terms of an existing contract. St. John`s Holdings was in the process of purchasing a Two Electronics property in Danvers, MA, and received a text message from Two Electronics containing a Letter of Intent (LOI). The text contained the terms of the contract and the names of the brokers who carried out the transaction.

In accordance with the instructions in the textu, St. John`s Holdings signed the Memorandum of Understanding and cut the cheque for the purchase of the property. Two Electronics later sold the property to a third party and refused to abide by the check and memorandum of understanding. The first case that appears to have sparked a discussion within the legal community about text messages is St. John`s Holdings, LLC v. Two Electronics, LLC. [4]. In this case, the seller sent an SMS to the buyer confirming that a statement of intent was acceptable and requested the buyer`s signature, but once the buyer signed, the seller refused to execute the final memorandum of understanding.

[5] The Massachusetts Regional Court held that “text messages and emails may comply with fraud law, provided that, like other writings, they contain the essential terms of the transaction and are signed by the parties to be engaged or by their authorized representatives.” [6] The St. John`s Holdings Court found that these conditions were met. The text implicitly contained the Memorandum of Understanding and retains all the main contractual conditions. Next, the court compared the text messages to electronic communications and found that the broker`s simple act of inserting his first name at the end of the message was sufficient to be considered a binding signature in the context of those negotiations. [7] Trevor primarily works with business owners and their families and advises clients in corporate structuring and dementia, compliance with legislation, contracts with third parties, liability protection and the general affairs of small entrepreneurs. His focus goes beyond legal advice and includes business strategy and asset maintenance. Trevor also works with families regarding their estate planning needs, including estate, fiduciary administration and wills.