Not just courts of law and courts of equity, but common law and equity as two distinct fields of law. The courts are now merged, so that courts now administer both law and equity, but they are still distinct fields (though probably more so in NSW than in pretty much any other part of the common law world). Is an account of profits a remedy available for breach of contract?
Ask a law student questions about things he's not qualified or interested to answer
- Thread starter ace99
- Start date
It's a remedy for breach of fiduciary duty (an equitable concept); you get the profits resulting from the breach, not just damages. Gains-based damages. So an equitable remedy for an equitable concept. In the UK (but not here, yet), there are some very limited circumstances in which you can get this remedy for breach of contract (which were arguably decisions made out of convenience rather than principle; see here), but for the most part it's not available because it'd be an equitable remedy for a breach at law. So the point of my question is whether, without that strict division between equity and law, you mix and match your wrongs and remedies. Whether you'd apply what to the rest of the common law world is an equitable remedy to a breach at law, or still maintain a de facto distinction, just without labelling them as two separate bodies of law (i.e. not allowing an account of profits as a remedy for breach of contract because it's a remedy for breach of fiduciary duty, rather than not allowing it because it's an equitable remedy (if the distinction between those two approaches makes sense)).
Equitable remedies are available and widely used in American courts, but an equitable remedy basically means non-monetary relief, like an injunction or restraining order or something. Money damages like lost profits are just lumped under damages.
BvBPL
Pour Decision Maker
If a statute creates strict liability for an occurance, can a vicitim of that occurance pursue a cause of action on negligence as well as under the statute? If so then can plaintiff collect twice, once under the claim of negligence and once under the statute, if they are both succesful?
Assume that the instant action may have been negligent, but ultimate determination is up to the fact finder. The statute itself is silent on relief.
Assume that the instant action may have been negligent, but ultimate determination is up to the fact finder. The statute itself is silent on relief.
Perfection
The Great Head.
if you could make new law about anything, what would it be?
"Hamburger tuesdays or your state loses federal education funding"
I have a question, what is the difference between a really expensive lawyer and a cheap one? That's not a bad joke, I honestly am curious if there is any difference in the quality of legal representation based off of pay.
BvBPL
Pour Decision Maker
Whats the difference between an expensive accountant and a cheap one? Or an expensive doctor and a cheap one? Differences in pay between professionals may be indicative of any number of the following :
- Competency
- Experience
- Rarity or surplus of specialty expertise
- General clientele (your Beverly Hills lawyer is likely to charge more because he can get more from his local clients)
- Size of the legal support staff or the firm generally
Lawyers may also demand differing retainers based on how they view the case. If a lawyer thinks that a case could take a while and might not be successful then he is more likely to ask for a higher retainer. It is possible that the lawyer next door may ask for a lower retainer as a means to catch business away from the first guy.
A lawyer who charges $100/hour gets $100/hour clients. A lawyer who charges $400/hour gets $400/hour clients. If you are/want to be a $400/hour lawyer you need $400/hour credentials.
But choosing a lawyer on price alone is a mistake. What you really want is a $400/hour lawyer who specializes and has success in your particular problem.
An attorney's hourly rate is a poor indicator of their quality. This is assuming you are even hiring a lawyer based on an hourly rate. A lot of Plaintiff-side practice operates on a contingency.
BvBPL
Pour Decision Maker
If anyone's interested, I'm willing to take questions in Ace's absence.
arya126
Squad Leader
How should somebody decide what area of law they want to enter into? For example, corporate, criminal, civil, etc.? And can you decide to switch to a different field or does specialization typically railroad you to what you started off as?
Also, within a field of law such as criminal, how should you go about deciding to go work private practice for a defense attorney or trying to become a prosecutor?
Im only a senior in high school so I have plenty of years before having to make any of these decisions, but that doesn't stop me from wondering anyway.
Also, within a field of law such as criminal, how should you go about deciding to go work private practice for a defense attorney or trying to become a prosecutor?
Im only a senior in high school so I have plenty of years before having to make any of these decisions, but that doesn't stop me from wondering anyway.
BvBPL
Pour Decision Maker
Generally speaking, specialization in law is not as formalized as specialization in, say, medicine. While a doc can be licensed as a gastrologist and may need to pass certain licensing exams or have a certain amount of specialized education to do so, in general a lawyer can simply choose to represent himself as an expert in criminal defense, or most other specialties. It is on the lawyer to ensure he has the sufficient skill to be an expert in those areas.
A notable exception is the patent bar. The patent bar requires specialized education.
That said, the rules can vary from state to state. While my state doesn't have any such specialization rules, other states may.
A notable exception is the patent bar. The patent bar requires specialized education.
That said, the rules can vary from state to state. While my state doesn't have any such specialization rules, other states may.
QuoVadisNation
keeping your angel alive
I have a question if you don't mind. Back to 2008-2009, I dropped out of law school after a year (top 40, I forget). The economy, work load, and fear of outstanding debt were my overarching reasons but there were a few more. Fast forward a few years and now I'm an educator teaching the fourth grade. I love my new profession but I'm wondering if the market for lawyers is still as bad as it was for grads in 2008. Clearly the OP feels this way but he seems a tad overhwhelmed.
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
This thread has given me hope for the future of the U.S. Sound reasonable to you?
What brought about the described demise of this profession? What part of it was so many of the manufacturers moving elsewhere? If manufacturing were to return would lawyers thrive on the blood of the businesses bringing work home to the US?
Has there been any change in the law to bring about this glorious end, such as a limit on lawsuits?
What brought about the described demise of this profession? What part of it was so many of the manufacturers moving elsewhere? If manufacturing were to return would lawyers thrive on the blood of the businesses bringing work home to the US?
Has there been any change in the law to bring about this glorious end, such as a limit on lawsuits?
BvBPL
Pour Decision Maker
I can't speak for Ace, but I can tell you the job market does not appear to be all sunshine and rainbows. Many of our adjunct professors as well as the faculty complain about the job situation.
That said, the best indicator of the legal job market has always been the larger economy. As the economy starts to recover, I expect the legal market to recover as well. That said, it will naturally lag behind the general recovery.
BvBPL
Pour Decision Maker
Probably the general economic downturn. Once people started to lose their homes, they also lost the ability to hire a litigator to track down creditors, fight a criminal charge, oversee real estate exchanges, or set up a business or contract. At the same time, corporate clients probably saw a smaller need for transactional work.
Tort reform in the last twenty years has significantly altered the personal injury field. Many rewards for torts are now much more limited, both in terms of actual damages and (moreso) punitive damages.
That said, tort law is only one aspect of the law. It seems highly likely to me that the market for real estate attorneys will increase significantly in the coming years as people try to recover from banks and other parties for invalid foreclosures and the like.
caketastydelish
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2008
- Messages
- 9,721
BvBPL, as you seem to have an interest in violent video games, what do you think of Jack Thompson getting de-barred?
Similar threads
