Legal Opinion
Francis v. Medill
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Decided May 2, 1928PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The ground of demurrer on which the defendant relies is that the complainants have a complete and adequate remedy at law, and that this court is therefore without jurisdiction.
The remedy of specific performance of a contract is available only where there is no adequate remedy at law for its breach. This was the exclusive test by which the Supreme Court of this State determined the right of the complainant to the relief of specific performance in G. W. Baker Machine Co. v. U. S. Fire Apparatus Co., 11 Del. Ch. 387,97 A. 613. Because the law supplies an adequate remedy by way of damages for the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Northern Central Railway Co. v. WalworthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Henry L. Doherty & Co. v. RiceU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Alabama · 1910
- Satterthwait v. MarshallCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1872
- Todd v. Diamond State Iron Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1889
- G. W. Baker Machine Co. v. U. S. Fire Apparatus Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1916
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Equitable Trust Co. v. GallagherSupreme Court of Delaware · 1954
- Allen W. Hinkel Dry Goods Co. v. Wichison Industrial Gas Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933
- Clark v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 2016
- Ringling v. Ringling Bros.—Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1946
- Lineberger v. WelshCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1972
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.