The Case Against Equity in American Contract Law

64 Pages Posted: 3 Oct 2019 Last revised: 6 Oct 2019

See all articles by Jody S. Kraus

Jody S. Kraus

Columbia University - Law School

Robert E. Scott

Columbia University - Law School

Date Written: October 1, 2019

Abstract

The American common law of contracts appears to direct courts to decide contract disputes by considering two opposing points of view: the ex ante perspective of the parties’ intent at the time of formation, and the ex post perspective of justice and fairness to the parties at the time of adjudication. Despite the black letter authority for both perspectives, the ex post perspective cannot withstand scrutiny. Contract doctrines taking the ex post perspective — such as the penalty, just compensation and forfeiture doctrines — were created by equity in the early common law to police against abuses of the then prevalent penal bond. However, when the industrial revolution pushed courts to accommodate fully executory agreements, and parties abandoned the use of penal bonds, the exclusively ex ante focus of the new contract law that emerged rendered the ex post doctrines obsolete. While intended initially to do justice between the parties, if used today these doctrines perversely and unjustly deny parties contractual rights that were bargained for in a free and fair agreement. Yet judges continue to recognize the ex post doctrines, even as they struggle to reconcile them with respect for the parties’ intent. Although infrequently applied, the ex post doctrines are far from dead letter. The penumbra of uncertainty they cast over contract adjudication continues to undermine contracting parties’ personal sovereignty. The only case for continuing to recognize these equitable interventions, therefore, must turn on whether they serve a new valid purpose. We consider and reject the possible purposes of paternalism and anti-opportunism suggested by contemporary pluralist scholars. In our view, the criteria governing theories of legal interpretation support the interpretation of contract law as exclusively serving personal sovereignty rather than any pluralist interpretation. Under its best interpretation, contract law has no place for the ex post perspective.

Keywords: contract interpretation, ex ante interpretation, ex post interpretation, contract theory, personal sovereignty and contract, paternalism and contract, law and equity

Suggested Citation

Kraus, Jody S. and Scott, Robert E., The Case Against Equity in American Contract Law (October 1, 2019). Southern California Law Review, (Vol 93, 2020) Forthcoming; Columbia Law and Economics Working Paper No. 609; Columbia Public Law Research Paper No. 14-638. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3462778

Jody S. Kraus

Columbia University - Law School ( email )

435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10025
United States

HOME PAGE: http://web.law.columbia.edu/faculty/jody-kraus

Robert E. Scott (Contact Author)

Columbia University - Law School ( email )

435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10025
United States
212-854-0072 (Phone)

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
152
Abstract Views
583
rank
201,033
PlumX Metrics