SERGIO P. PONCE AND CHARLES HIME
v.
NICHOLAS P. DEMOS, ALSO KNOWN AS NICKY DEMOS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this 1947 Florida Supreme Court case, the court addressed whether a bill in equity based on fraud is the proper remedy to cancel an option contract and recover a down payment. The court affirmed the chancellor's decision, holding that while equity generally will not act when an adequate legal remedy exists, in borderline cases where expeditious relief is needed, equity has discretion to provide the more appropriate forum.
The court held that while equity will not ordinarily act when an adequate legal remedy exists, in borderline cases the chancellor has broad discretion to choose between forums based on which remedy will provide the most expeditious and effective relief to the wronged party. The court affirmed the chancellor's decision because the facts presented circumstances where equitable relief was justified.
“the test of whether law or equity affords the most adequate remedy may be revealed by the answer to the question, which remedy will afford the most expeditious relief to the person wronged”
Establishes the primary test for determining whether equity jurisdiction is appropriate—expeditious relief rather than technical adequacy of legal remedies
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn June 1946, the appellee deposited $2,500 as a binder on an option contract to purchase a bar and package store from the appellants. The appellee al…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Cancellation Of Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
In June 1946, appellee deposited $2500.00 with appellants as a binder on an option contract to purchase a bar and package store. In July following, appellee filed his bill of complaint against appellants as defendants, praying for cancellation of the contract and return of the $2500.00, alleging fraud as the basis for his action. On final hearing the chancellor found for appellee, cancelled the contract and ordered return of the $2500.00. This appeal is from the final decree.
The point for determination is whether or not a bill in equity, based on fraud, is the proper remedy to cancel an option contract and require return of the down payment, absent allegations showing the lack of a full and adequate legal remedy.
It would be commonplace to announce that equity will not entertain a suggestion to cancel a contract for fraud when *118the remedy by law is adequate, but the test of whether law or equity affords the most adequate remedy may be revealed by the answer to the question, which remedy will afford the most expeditious relief to the person wronged. From the facts presented it appears that the subject matter of the litigation was about to be dissipated or put out of the reach of complainant before relief by law could be affected. This and other elements may have made that course equivocal.
So, the rule that equity will not function when there is an adequate legal remedy, undoubtedly controls the clear cut unequivocal case, but in borderline cases like this, the chancellor has a broad discretion in choosing between forums. In doing so he is not to be so much concerned with refinements in pleading as he is with adopting the forum that will give aid to the party wronged. If the remedy at law is not as sensitive to the prompt administration of justice as the remedy at equity, then the latter should be adopted.
In balancing the efficacy of remedies, the chancellor is concerned with that which points the speedy course to justice, he is not to indulge in refinements of procedure while the rem goes out of the picture or flees to another jurisdiction. Whether justice is administered a la mode or carte blanche is not so material, but it is material that it be administered promptly and effectively.
From the facts and the supporting evidence, we find a basis for the decree appealed from which is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
THOMAS, C. J., CHAPMAN, J., and WILLIAMS, Associate Justice, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McNORTON v. PAN Am. Bank OF Orlando, N.A., 387 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…ertain, prompt, speedy, sufficient, full and complete, practical and efficient in attaining the ends of justice. Citizens & So. Nat. Bank v. Taylor, 191 So. 2d 866, 867 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966). The Florida Supreme Court in Ponce v. Demos, 159 Fla. 117, 31 So. 2d 58 (1947) discussed the standard for determining adequacy of the remedy at law: [T]he test of whether law or equity affords the most adequate remedy may be revealed by the answer to the question, which remedy will afford the most expeditious relief to…
-
Gulf Life Ins. Co. v. Urquiaga, 251 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)…shown, therefore, the judgment appealed from should be, and the same is hereby, affirmed. PIERCE, C. J., and LILES, J., concur. . See, e. g., Wilson v. Wakulla Edgewater Co. (1948), 160 Fla. 702, 36 So. 2d 440; Ponce v. Demos (1947), 159 Fla. 117, 31 So. 2d 58, and McNabb v. Tampa & St. Petersburg Land Co. (1919), 78 Fla. 149, 83 So. 90. . See, 30A C.J.S. Equity § 510; and 27 Am.Jur.2d Equity § 242. . Emery v. International Glass & Mfg., Inc., Fla.App., 249 So. 2d 496, Opinion filed June 16, 1971. . Se…
-
Merton J. Cushman v. Schubert, 110 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)…e marbles. The case then would seem to fall clearly within the jurisdiction of equity, and if we entertain any doubt it would have to be resolved in favor of the chancellor’s discretion. As it was so aptly put in Ponce v. Demos, 1947, 159 Fla. 117, 31 So. 2d 58, 59: “So, the rule that equity will not function when there is an adequate legal remedy, undoubtedly controls the clear cut unequivocal case, but in borderline cases like this, the chancellor has a broad discretion in choosing between forums. In do…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence