Remedies Flashcards
when will specific performance be granted
- uniqueness
- something would prevent money damages from giving full relief
- reluctant to grant bc supervision
what are the equitable defenses?
- unclean hands
- laches
- unconscionability
- estoppel (promissory & equitable)
unclean hands
- either party can use
- ct looks only to P’s conduct b/c they’re the person seeking aid of ct
- conduct must have Immediate + necessary relation to equity sought
- not limited to illegal conduct
defense - Unconscionability
- Similar to legal remedy of “public policy” considerations
* Needs to be very oppressive / totally unfair to rise to this level
Laches
Test: whether theres been a delay which has resulted in injury, embarrassment or disadvantage of any person, but particularly against whom relief is sought
- weigh justification for delay vs prejudice to D as result
Contempt - Can words cause contempt?
vehemence of the language used is not, on its own, enough to punish for contempt. It must constitute an imminent, not merely likely, threat to the admin of justice.
How to determine if the contempt is civil or criminal
Look at the sanction (not the act) - nature and purpose of the contempt controls
Difference in payment of fine for civil and crim contempt?
- Fine paid to the person who needs to be compensated = civil
- Fine paid to the court = criminal
Promissory Estoppel
- party did/said something calculated/intended to induce another to believe certain facts exist + act on it
- other party changed position in reliance on those facts, thereby incurring an injury
A contempt fine is considered civil and remedial if
- it either coerces ∆ into compliance w court order, or compensates complainant for losses sustained.
- where not compensatory, its civil only if there’s an opportunity to purge
justification for coercive imprisonment
ability to comply w court order. once grand jury is discharged, witness can no longer be held bc no opportunity left to purge
Constitutional procedural safeguards
- Privilege against self incrim
- possible right to a jury trial
- proof beyond a reasonable doubt
- right to present a defense,
- double jeopardy protection
- notice of charges
- assistance of counsel
standard of proof for criminal contempt
State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that ∆ willfully disobeyed the order
Direct/Summary Criminal Contempt
- inside courtroom
- willful disobedience
- act impacts adversely on authority of ct
Indirect Criminal Contempt - elements
- Valid order
- Clear + unambiguous
- Willful disobedience
- If time element then they must’ve had a reasonable amount of time to comply
- If reason is disrespect to a judge then that judge cannot proceed over the hearing without ∆’s consent
Contempt proceedings can be commenced in 2 ways:
- Courts own motion
2. At the behest of a party – party files an “order to show cause” why ∆ should be held in contempt
If the judge does not order a jury trial then the judge is limited to
- labeling the contempt as petty, giving less than 6 months jail time + fine less than $500
- Multiple (but not concurrent) sentences, when aggregated exceeding 6 mo, tried in 1 proceeding, have right to jury trial.
Collateral Bar Rule
An order issued by a court with jdx over the subject matter and person must be obeyed by the parties until it is reversed by orderly and proper proceedings.
Collateral challenges
ignoring the order and challenging it in the contempt hearing
Defenses applicable in contempt proceedings:
- ∆ claim not bound by decree (lack of PJ/SMJ)
- Didn’t receive notice of orders req’s
- actions didn’t violate / impossible to comply
- transparent invaldity
collateral challenges - prosecution has the burden to show what?
a willful violation: ∆ knew of the order and had the ability to comply
Collateral bar - Majority (Walker)
Order must be obeyed even if constitutionally invalid.
• Gen rule - if ct reviewing order finds it had any pretense to validity at time issued, the reviewing ct should enforce collateral bar rule.
Collateral bar - Minority (CA)
No duty to obey “transparently invalid” or “void” orders (therefore crim contempt convictions of those cannot stand)
Nature and Purpose of Injunctive Relief
a. Mandatory (compel an act)
b. Prohibitory (forbid an act)
c. Mandatory not favored b/c then court has to monitor; Prohibitory doesn’t require supervision
Preliminary Injunction - Elements
Similar req to TRO but lasts until end of trial or modification. Notice is mandatory. Hearing is req. Bon is typically req.
Preliminary injunctions appeal standard
abuse of discretion
TRO elements
- irreperable + imminent injury
- likelihood of success on the merits (most cts use “reasonable probability of success”)
- Balancing of the hardships
- not adverse to public interest (important for con issues. benefit 1 person or community?)
When can a TRO be ex parte?
if you can convince court that there’s a need for immediate adjudication, and there’d be a great harm if you gave notice to other side
When can a prelim be ex parte?
never
who is bound by a TRO or prelim?
is only binding on those “who receive actual notice of the order by personal service or otherwise”
Injunctions - “Constructive” notice elements
- Must come from a credible source, and
2. Must inform the ∆ clearly and plainly from what act he must abstain