【正文】 d. Not all promise are enforceable and several criteria must be met before the law will give a remedy. Two of the most fundamental of these are the requirement of a writing and requirement of consideration . the requirement of a writing is imposed by statutes of frauds, derived from the English Statute of Frauds of 1677, which have been enacted throughout the United States. Typically they provide that, with some exceptions, specified kinds of contracts are unenforceable unless evidenced by a writing. They usually cover contracts to sell goods of more than a minimum value, contracts to sell land, contracts to answer for the debt of another, and contracts not to be performed within a year. Many agreements, such as most contracts to furnish services, are not included and are enforceable even if there is no writing. Although dissatisfaction has led to the repeal of most of the English Statute of Frauds in 1954,there has been no serious movement for its abolition in the United States. apart from any requirement of a writing, a promise is not generally enforceable in the United States unless it is supported by consideration. Historically a promissory could make a binding written promise, even without consideration, by affixing his wax seal to the writing. But as the wax seal was replaced by a penned or printed imitation, the seal became an empty formality and its effectiveness has now been eliminated or at least greatly diminished by state statutes. Consideration is essentially something for which the promisor has bargained and which he has received in exchange for his own promise. It may be another promise given in return, in which case the resulting contract is known as a bilateral contract, or it may be an act given in return, in which case the resulting contract is known as unilateral contract. But , for example, a gratuitous promise, including one to pay for goods or services which have already supported by consideration. Fortunately there are only a few such instances of business promises in which the requirement of consideration is not met. One of the most troublesome involves the “firm”, or irrevocable, offer. The usual rule in the United States is that an offeror has the power to revoke his offer at any time before its acceptance by the offeree, and a promise by the offeror not to revoke is not generally effective unless supported by consideration. A mon device for holding the offeror to his promise is the payment to him of a nominal sum, for example one dollar, as consideration for what is then known as an “option.” Even without consideration a few courts have held that the offeror was estopped, or precluded, from revoking his offer where the offeree relied to his detriment upon the promise. But the most satisfactory solution has been through legislation, adopted in a number of states, making an offer irrevocable, regardless of consideration, if it is embodied in a signed writing which states that it is irrevocable. As this suggests, the tendency has been to attempt to remedy the deficiencies of the doctrine of consideration rather than to discard it. In the United States, contracts, like statutes, are characteristically detailed and prolix. Those prepared by lawyers are often pounded of standard clauses, popularly known as “boilerplate,” taken from other agreements kept on file or from books. Even when a lawyer is not directly involved, the parties may use or incorporate by reference a standard printed form which has been drafted by a lawyer, perhaps for a particular enterprise, perhaps for an association of enterprises, or perhaps for sale to the general public. This attention to detail may be due to a number of causes, including the standardization of routine transactions, the frequent involvement of lawyers in