|Statement||By John Adams, jun.|
|Contributions||Ludlow, James R. 1825-1886., Collins, John M. 1824-1896., Wharton, Henry, 1827-1880.|
|LC Classifications||KF399 .A3 1859|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||lxviii, -868 p.|
|Number of Pages||868|
|LC Control Number||29014533|
The doctrine of equity: being a commentary on the law as administered by the Court of Chancery John Adams, James Reily Ludlow, John MacMinn Collins T. & J.W. Johnson, - Equity pleading and. The Doctrine of Equity | This is a reproduction of a book published before This book may have occasional imperfections such as missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. that were either part of the original artifact, or were introduced by the scanning process. The Doctrine of Equity: A Commentary on the Law As Administered by the Court of Chancery by John MacMinn Collins, James Reily Ludlow and John Adams (, Hardcover). Great Britain. Court of chancery. [from old catalog], Equity, Equity pleading and procedure, Equity, Equity pleading and procedure Publisher Philadelphia, T. & J. W. Johnson & co. Collection americana Digitizing sponsor Google Book from the collections of unknown library Language EnglishPages:
Great Britain. Court of Chancery, Equity, Equity, Equity pleading and procedure, Equity pleading and procedure Publisher Philadelphia, T. & J. Johnson & co. Collection americana Digitizing sponsor Google Book from the collections of unknown library Language EnglishPages: Here equity, regarding individuals, weighs against utility, regarding the whole society. The latter being by far the more weighty consideration, must pre∣ponderate: and for that reason only are wadsets tolerated, even the most lucrative; for it is not safe to give any redress in equity. This doctrine may be illustrated by a . Equity might be described as softening or correcting the common law. in the context of forming a contract, the doctrine of estoppel is an example of equity overcoming the strict common law rules regarding consideration (see Chapter 4: Undue influence, Unconscionable Conduct and Estoppel).File Size: KB. Before the doctrines, equity was what the Chancellor believed was equity. In the middle of the 17 th century, John Selden criticized this state of affairs, noting that equity was a roguish thing that varied according to the conscience of the individual Chancellor, in the same way as if the standard measure were a Chancellor’s foot. .
It is my fervent hope, and optimistic belief, that the doctrine of equity contains within it so many intrinsic contradictions that it will fatally undermine the ideology of the radical left. Imagine for a moment what would actually have to be done for true equity across identity groups to manifest itself. The Principles is divided into three books. The first two, “theoretical,” books examine the powers of a court of equity as derived from justice and from utility, the two great principles Kames felt governed equity. The third book aims to be more practical, showing the application of these powers to several subjects, such as bankrupts. Business law professor Leigh Anenson at the University of Maryland's Robert H. Smith School of Business discusses the legal concept of equity. Her book, "Judging Equity. The doctrine of equity was created to fill in the gaps of common law by providing more flexible remedies, unlike common law which only provide damages such as injunction, specific performance, equitable estoppel etc. Equity only governed by the maxims where it is based on the principles of fairness and conscience and are not as strict as common law.