Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Adequate remedy
 | The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (March 2024) |
| Judicial remedies |
|---|
| Legal remedies (Damages) |
| Equitable remedies |
| Related issues |
An adequate remedy or adequate remedy at law is part of a legal remedy (either court-ordered or negotiated between the litigants) which the court deems satisfactory, without recourse to an equitable remedy.[1][2] This consideration expresses to the court whether money should be awarded or a court order should be decreed.[1] "Adequate remedy at law" refers to the sufficient compensation for the loss or damages caused by the defendant with a proper monetary award.[3] The court must grant the adequacy of remedy that will lead to a "meaningful hearing". Whether legal damages or equitable relief are requested depends largely on,whether or not the remedy can be valued.[3] Both two elements, compensation and the meaningfulness of hearing, provide a proper way to have an adequate remedy. The word "meaningfulness" of hearing in the law process is the assumption that the defendant compensated must be meaningful for the injured party where the defendant made a fully covered compensation for all the losses.[3] Hence, the hearing in which cannot give any right amount of compensation award or settlement is not "meaningful", and the unavailability of the compensation will lead to an inadequate remedy. The adequate remedy at law is the legal remedies by meaning it is satisfactory compensation by way of monetary damages without granting equitable remedies.[4]
As an operation of law, an attorney often must present to the court whether there is an adequate remedy. This would be a basic principle of equity.[2][5] When a monetary award is not an adequate or appropriate remedy, equity can order a "specific performance", an order of the court requiring a party to perform the obligations that he or she undertook to perform under the contract.[6] The "specific performance" exists when there is an exchange under a contract that can not be found easily elsewhere or at all, such as antiques, parcels of land. Damages are often bifurcated or determined in a separate trial or as a part in parcel of different determination from whether a certain tort or contract has occurred.[3]
| Legal Remedy | |
|---|---|
| Federal Rules of Civil Procedures | |
| |
| Territorial extent | United States |
| Enacted by | Federal Rules of Civil Procedures |
| Commenced | 1938 |
| Introduced by | judiciary ACT of 1789 |
| Status: Unknown | |
- ^ a b Lehman, Jeffrey; Phelps, Shirelle (2005). West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 1 (2 ed.). Detroit: Thomson/Gale. p. 93. ISBN 9780787663742.
- ^ a b Complete Digest of All Lawyers Reports Annotated, p. 3749, found at Google book search. See also, the cases cited therein. Retrieved December 18, 2008.
- ^ a b c d Chapman, K (1985). Parratt v. Taylor: Defining the Adequate Remedy Requirement.
- ^ Brinton, Sarah L. (2013). "Toward Adequacy". SSRN Working Paper Series. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2228386. ISSN 1556-5068. S2CID 219357361.
- ^ William L. Clark, Jr., Handbook Of The Law Of Contracts, found at Chest of Books.com website. Retrieved December 18, 2008.
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
:2was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Previous Page Next Page
