Sripetch v. SEC · ¶26
Perhaps the easiest way to see why traditional equitable principles associated with disgorgement do not require proof of pecuniary loss is to contrast that remedy with the legal remedy of damages. Ordinarily, when a person violates the legal rights of another, a court will order the wrongdoer to pay damages measured by the “plaintiff 's loss.” D. Dobbs & C. Roberts, Law of Remedies: Damages–Equity–Restitution §3.1, p. 213 (3d ed. 2018) (Dobbs). The primary goal is “to put the plaintiff in as good a position as he would have been in” absent the wrongdoer's actions. 3 S. Williston, Law of Contracts § 1338, p. 2392 (1920); see also Dobbs § 3.1, at 215 (“[D]amages is an instrument of corrective justice, an effort to put [the] plaintiff in his or her rightful position”).Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.