There is unnecessary confusion and difference of opinion over the effect of the statute of frauds as a bar to reformation that would otherwise be available in connection with bargain transactions. Both the confusion and the conflict could be eliminated if it were clearly perceived that a decree of reformation is not the enforcement of an oral contract. Instead, it is a correction of the writing in question, or more basically a recognition that the legally significant agreement is the one the parties intended to express or describe in the writing. It is a separate question whether the writing as corrected complies with the statute of frauds so as to make the agreement enforceable.
George E. Palmer,
Reformation and the Statute of Frauds,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol65/iss3/2