Thomas Jefferson explained in 1785 that there are three main limitations on the power of a court of equity: "If the legislature means to enact an injustice, however palpable, the court of Chancery is not the body with whom a correcting power is lodged. That it shall not interpose in any case which does not come within a general description and admit of redress by a general and practicable rule." The US Supreme Court, however, has concluded that courts have wide discretion to fashion relief in cases of equity. The first major statement of this power came in Willard v. Tayloe, 75 U.S. 557 (1869). The Court concluded that "relief is not a matter of absolute right to either party; it is a matter resting in the discretion of the court, to be exercised upon a consideration of all the circumstances of each particular case." Willard v. Tayloe was for many years the leading case in contract law regarding intent and enforcement. as well as equity.
thomas jefferson explained in 1785 that there are three main limitations on the power of a court of equity "if the legislature means to enact an injustice however palpable the court of chancery is not the body with whom a correcting power is lodged that it shall not interpose in any case which does not come within a general description and admit of redress by a general and practicable rule" the us supreme court however has concluded that courts have wide discretion to fashion relief in cases of equity the first major statement of this power came in willard v tayloe 75 us 557 (1869) the court concluded that "relief is not a matter of absolute right to either party; it is a matter resting in the discretion of the court to be exercised upon a consideration of all the circumstances of each particular case" willard v tayloe was for many years the leading case in contract law regarding intent and enforcement as well as equity