1 Barb. 315 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1847
Although there may be cases in which a court of equity will decree specific performance of a contract for personal services, still, this is not one of that character. The difficulty, if not the utter impracticability, of compelling a specific performance of the contract set forth in the bill, is a conclusive reason why this court should refuse its interference. The complainant should be left to his remedy at law. If, however, there were any doubt, upon principle, yet, I consider it abundantly settled upon authority, that the complainant can have no relief upon the equity side of the court. The cases of Kemble v. Kean, (6 Sim. R. 333,) and Hamblin v. Dinnefard,
As this case is not one in which the court will grant relief, of course there is nothing to sustain the writ of ne exeat. The injunction must therefore be dissolved, and the writ of ne exeat discharged.