Cooper v. Pena

Citations

• 21 Cal. 403

Syllabus

<p>Equity will not enforce the specific performance of a contract where the party-asking its enforcement cannot, from the nature of the contract, be compelled to perform, it specifically on his part.</p> <p>In order that a specific performance of a contract may be compelled, the remedy as well as the obligation must be mutual, and as a general rule the question of mutuality is to be determined by the contract itself, and is not affected by circumstances arising after the contract is made and the rights of the parties fixed.</p> <p>The cases in which a want of mutuality at the time the contract has been entered into has been held not to be sufficient reason for refusing to enforce it—as in contracts with infants, those between lessor and lessee, trustee and cestui que trust, voluntary settlements, and the like—are exceptional cases in which peculiar considerations have been allowed to override the principle of mutuality, and they do not contravene the general rule as above stated.</p> <p>The specific performance of a contract is not a matter of course, but rests in the sound discretion of the Court upon a view of all the circumstances, and before the Court will act it must be satisfied that the contract is reasonable and equal in its operation.</p> <p>Equity will not enforce specifically a contract for personal services—especially where they are confidential in their nature and involve in their performance the exercise of discretionary authority—but will leave the party to his remedy at law.</p> <p>Eor the purpose of enforcing specific performance of stipulations, the consideration for which was an agreement by the plaintiff to perform personal services, an offer to perform these services is not equivalent to an actual performance. The rejection of the offer by the defendant excuses the performance as a condition precedent, but does not release the plaintiff from his obligation to perform so long as he insists upon the agreement.</p>