As an operation of law, an attorney often must present to the court whether there is an adequate remedy at law. This consideration contemplates and expresses to the court whether money should be awarded or a court order should be decreed. A part of the balancing whether legal damages or equitable relief, respectively, should be requested depends largely on if the remedy can be valuated. For example, a neighbor building on another's parcel would have little or no value that can be paid because land is unique, and an inadequate value could be ascertained. Vis-à-vis considerations with a neighbor borrowing your car and being 100 % at fault for an accident. In the latter case, the valuation of the car plus other consequentially caused damages can be reasonably valuated. February 2006 : ← - January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December- → 28 February 2006 (Tuesday) Al Askari Mosque bombing: Sixty-eight people have been killed so far today in Baghdad, Iraq. ...

Therefore, as a general rule, where the fair market value can readily be assessed, with certain carved exceptions, the remedy at law is damages (or money). Whereas, the "inadequacy" of a remedy at law leads a lawyer usually to seek equitable relief from the court.

There is no such claim as an adequate relief claim. Damages are often bifurcated or determined in a separate trial or as a part in parcel of different determination from whether a certain tort or contract (etc.) has occurred.