Section 4.23 Inadequacy of Remedy at Law

• Library: Contracts 2016 Supp

1. (§4.23) Inadequacy of Remedy at Law

It is a fundamental rule of equity that the jurisdiction of a court of equity depends on the absence of an adequate remedy at law. Stated another way, a court of equity lacks jurisdiction to grant equitable relief when there is an adequate remedy at law. Blue Cross Health Servs., Inc. v. Sauer, 800 S.W.2d 72 (Mo. App. E.D. 1990); Brown v. Jones, 735 S.W.2d 155 (Mo. App. E.D. 1987); Bradley v. McNeill, 709 S.W.2d 153 (Mo. App. E.D. 1986). This rule is applied in cases of specific performance, and such a claim will not be granted unless it appears that the plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Seabaugh v. Keele, 775 S.W.2d 205 (Mo. App. E.D. 1989); State ex rel. Dowd v. Turpin, 576 S.W.2d 754 (Mo. App. E.D. 1979); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 359(1) (1981). In determining whether an award of damages in an action at law would be adequate so as to bar specific performance, the question is whether the damages would put the injured person in a situation that is as beneficial as if the contract were specifically enforced. Asbury v....