Opinion ID: 1811133
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: The Chancery Court erred in awarding improper relief.

Text: Valley Forge argues that the non-monetary relief granted by the chancellor violates important legal principles by going beyond what is necessary to decide the pending case and by disregarding the cautious approach to punitive damages advocated by this Court. There are two rules applicable to this issue. First, chancellors have only those remedial powers necessary to a particular case: The remedial powers of our chancellors are sufficient to vindicate the claims and interests of all litigants. Those powers are as broad as equity and justice require. Those powers have always been marked by flexibility and expansiveness so that appropriate remedies may be decreed to satisfy the needs of the particular case. The chancellor's remedial powers are marked by plasticity. Equity jurisdiction permits innovation that justice may be done. That there is no precedent for the exact relief sought is of no consequence. Courts of equity have all remedial powers necessary to the particular case, except those that are expressly forbidden by law. Hall v. Wood, 443 So.2d 834, 842-43 (Miss. 1983) (emphasis added). The second general rule is that punitive damages in Chancery Court are not favored and are to be allowed only with caution and within narrow limits. Tideway Oil Programs, Inc. v. Serio, 431 So.2d 454 (Miss. 1983) (footnote 1); Standard Life Ins. Co. of Indiana v. Veal, 354 So.2d 239 (Miss. 1977). Obviously the corrective measures fashioned by the chancellor were not intended to be of any direct benefit to the plaintiff in this case. Although his intentions were laudable, matters of such general and far reaching import are better left to the legislative branch. Courts have only the more narrow duty to interpret the law. Furthermore, we do not consider the conduct related to the settlement in Louisiana sufficiently culpable to justify punitive damages. For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the award of the second million dollars as well as the alternative affirmative measures.