Abstract
This paper examines the role of equity in post-merger American law. I propose that for a period of time following the merger of law and equity, the remnants of historical equity provided a partial compromise between the benefits of determinate rules and the impulse to correct adverse outcomes of rules. For better or worse, this compromise has mostly ceased to hold, thanks to general acceptance of the principles that animated American Legal Realism.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
