Reicherts. • Even if the Reicherts chose to reduce their rent by 50 percent for 9 months, they would still pay almost $27,000 more during that period than Ridco for approximately the same store space. • The evidence showed that there was a flat economy in the area and that Ridco’s lower rent gave it an unfair competitive advantage. • Hammond and Ridco anticipated that the addition of a Riddles store would force the closure of one of the Reicherts’ stores before July 2004. • Although parties are free to contract for a particular remedy for a breach of contract, this case was an equitable action to prevent a breach, or further breach, of the lease agreements. The court relied upon a 1925 case for its ruling. See Nebraska Wheat Growers Ass’n v. Norquest, 113 Neb. 731, 204 N.W. 798 (1925) (<HOLDING>). The court held the reduction in rent was an
holding that the nevada industrial insurance acts exclusive remedy provision did not bar an employees claims for injunctive relief holding that liquidated damages provision did not provide adequate remedy at law or prevent injunctive relief holding that where plaintiffs filed a complaint for conversion unjust enrichment and injunctive relief they had an adequate remedy at law holding that adequate alternative state remedy must provide the possibility of relief under the circumstances holding a claim for money damages is an adequate remedy at law and so it does not provide a sufficient basis for injunctive relief notwithstanding the possibility that a money judgment will be uncollectible