Curtice Bros. v. Catts
New Jersey Court of Chancery
On final hearing, pleading and proofs. Complainant is engaged in the business of canning tomatoes and seeks the specific performance of a contract wherein defendant agreed to sell to complainant the entire product of certain land planted with tomatoes. Defendant contests the power of this court to grant equitable relief.
1Opinion of the Court
Beaming, Y. C.
The fundamental principles which guide a court of equity in decreeing the specific performance of contracts are essentially the same whether the contracts relate to realty or to personalty. By reason of the fact that damages for the breach of a contract for the sale of personalty are, in most cases, easily ascertainable and recoverable at law, courts of equity in such cases withhold equitable relief. Touching contracts for the sale of land the reverse is the case. But no inherent difference between real estate and personal property controls the exercise of the jurisdiction.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- The Mechanics Bank of Alexandria v. LOUISA & MARIA SETONSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- Barr v. LapsleySupreme Court of the United States · 1816
3Cited by12 opinions
- Texas Farm Bureau Cotton Ass'n v. StovallTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Oregon Growers' Co-operative Ass'n v. LentzOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Dover Shopping Center, Inc. v. Cushman's Sons, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1960
- Big Four Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Hawaiian Pineapple Co. v. SaitoHawaii Supreme Court · 1919
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.