Key Takeaways

  • Equitable damages are non-monetary remedies that require parties to act or refrain from acting in specific ways.
  • The concept of exclusive equity jurisprudence arises from courts of equity having distinct powers separate from courts of law, historically providing remedies unavailable at law.
  • Equitable remedies such as injunctions, specific performance, rescission, and reformation are granted when legal damages are insufficient.
  • Exclusive equity jurisdiction may still apply in certain family law or trust matters.
  • U.S. courts today often provide both legal and equitable remedies in the same case, reflecting a merged system.
  • A claim must meet certain criteria, like no adequate legal remedy and balance of hardships, for equitable relief to be granted.

The equitable damages definition explains how courts handle a situation when a monetary payment is not sufficient and requires a defendant to perform their part of a contract. Equitable damages allow the defendant to fulfill their obligations stated in the contract without the court imposing a fine. 

Overview of Equitable Damages

In a court of law, a common practice that applies is to award a monetary payment for damages to one party. In a court of equity, the party is ordered to either perform or refrain from doing a specific act to ensure an equitable resolution. 

In both situations where monetary damages are being requested or a specific action must be performed or halted, an individual can make the requests from the same court to handle both cases. 

Due to the complexity of civil lawsuits, a court may order that both legal and equitable relief be granted in a single case.

The court system in the United States combines the principles of equity and law to allow the legal system to provide legal and equitable relief in cases put before the court. In this way, courts are following the concept of equity by being fair and impartial without bias. 

Difference Between an Equitable and Legal Claim

Winning a lawsuit does not automatically mean a person will be awarded money. There are two types of claims: equitable and legal. 

Equitable Claim

When an individual or a business entity asks that the court grant an injunction, this means a judge is being asked to compel an opposing party to do something or stop doing something. 

Many times, an injunction is granted for the sole purpose of preventing harm from being done while the dispute is being litigated. An example would be a developer petitioning the city to re-zone an area, demolish old buildings, and build a shopping complex. The residents do not want the historical buildings destroyed and they petition the court for an injunction. Once granted, whether temporarily or permanently, the developer cannot move forward with eliminating the potential "harm/damage." This action is considered an equitable remedy.

Legal Claim

The majority of lawsuits filed in U.S. courts are legal claims where an individual is claiming the actions of another individual or entity resulted in some form of loss. This can include:

  • Bodily injury due to an accident.
  • Property damage resulting from a contractor's negligence.
  • Financial losses due to fraud.

When a legal claim is filed, it is up to the plaintiff to prove to the court that he or she suffered a loss due to the actions or failure to act by the defendant. If the plaintiff is successful, the court may order the defendant to make a monetary payment to the plaintiff. This action is considered to be making the plaintiff "whole." A monetary award is referred to as "damages."

Equitable Distribution

An equitable distribution is the legal term used for the fair division and distribution of marital property and debt when a couple is divorcing. The distribution includes financial assets such as cars, household furnishings, and the family home as well as division of the debt. 

The court system in most states does not arbitrarily make a 50/50 division and instead relies on the financial condition of both parties. Also, spousal support may be awarded to either party when the court is determining a fair judgment. 

Equitable Remedy and Breach of Contract

Equitable remedies can be categorized as either legal or equitable and can be used in a breach of contract situation. With legal remedy, the non-breaching party is allowed to recover monetary damages. With an equitable remedy, the court prescribes actions to resolve the dispute or breach. 

An equitable remedy is typically granted with monetary compensation or when legal remedies cannot resolve the dispute or breach. Often, before a court will determine equitable relief, it is required that legal damages be unavailable.

In a breach of contract dispute, three equitable remedies are available:

  • Specific Performance - This a court order or decree requiring the party in breach of contract to completely perform their part of the contract.
  • Contract Rescission - The old contract is rescinded.
  • Contract Reformation - The former contract is rewritten to reflect the intentions of each party more clearly and accurately. There must be a valid working contract in place before this action can be taken.

When Courts Favor Equitable Relief

Courts may award equitable remedies over legal damages when:

  • Monetary damages are inadequate to remedy the harm (e.g., the subject of the dispute is unique, like real estate).
  • The harm is ongoing or future-oriented, such as a continuing violation of a non-compete clause or misuse of trade secrets.
  • Irreparable harm would result if no action is taken immediately—such as destruction of a historically significant structure.
  • Legal remedies are impractical or speculative, particularly in contract disputes where valuation is difficult or enforcement is complex.

Before granting equitable relief, courts often evaluate:

  • The presence of clean hands (i.e., the claimant must not have acted unethically).
  • Whether the balance of hardships favors the party seeking relief.
  • If the equity relief serves public interest.
  • Whether there is a lack of adequate remedy at law.

These considerations align with the traditions of exclusive equity jurisprudence, where equitable principles guide court discretion and ensure justice beyond the reach of strict legal rules.

Understanding Exclusive Equity Jurisprudence

Exclusive equity jurisprudence refers to the historical jurisdiction of courts of equity to hear and resolve certain disputes that could not be addressed adequately by common law courts. In early English and American legal systems, equity courts provided remedies that were not available through legal claims—particularly when money damages were insufficient to deliver justice.

Examples of cases falling under exclusive equity jurisdiction include:

  • Trusts and fiduciary duties – These involve oversight and enforcement of trustees' actions.
  • Family law matters – Issues like custody, adoption, and guardianship were traditionally resolved in equity.
  • Specific performance of unique contracts – For example, compelling the transfer of a rare piece of property.

Today, although most U.S. jurisdictions have merged courts of law and equity, the term exclusive equity jurisprudence still appears in contexts where courts are empowered to grant uniquely equitable remedies due to the inadequacy of legal relief. When a party seeks equitable relief such as an injunction or specific performance, the court considers whether the claim is based on equitable principles historically recognized under exclusive equity jurisdiction.

This concept ensures the integrity of equitable relief and maintains distinctions when necessary—for instance, in matters involving fraud, fiduciary relationships, or unique property interests.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is exclusive equity jurisprudence?
    It refers to the authority of equity courts to hear and decide cases where legal remedies, such as monetary damages, are inadequate or unavailable.
  2. When do courts prefer equitable remedies?
    Courts favor equitable relief when monetary compensation cannot fully resolve the harm, such as in cases involving unique property or ongoing misconduct.
  3. What types of cases fall under exclusive equity jurisdiction?
    Cases involving trusts, fiduciary duties, family law, or specific performance of unique contracts historically fall within exclusive equity jurisdiction.
  4. How are equitable claims different from legal claims?
    Equitable claims seek non-monetary relief like injunctions or specific performance, while legal claims typically seek monetary compensation.
  5. Can a court issue both legal and equitable remedies?
    Yes. In modern U.S. courts, it’s common for both types of remedies to be awarded in a single case when appropriate.

If you need help with the exclusive equity jurisprudence, you can post your legal need on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.