A.B. Wood v. De Forrest Richards was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. Wood, the plaintiff, had contracted with Richards, the defendant, to purchase a steamboat for $2,000. Wood had paid $1,000 as a down payment and was to pay the remaining $1,000 upon delivery of the boat. However, Richards failed to deliver the boat and Wood sued for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Wood was entitled to recover the $1,000 down payment, plus interest, from Richards. The Court reasoned that the contract was valid and binding, and that Richards had breached it by failing to deliver the boat. The Court also held that Wood was entitled to recover damages for the breach of contract, including the down payment plus interest. The Court's decision in this case established the principle that a party who breaches a contract is liable for damages, including the return of any money paid as part of the contract. This principle has been applied in numerous cases since then and is still an important part of contract law today.

In the case of A.B. Wood v. De Forrest Richards, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had erred by failing to consider an important part of the contract between the parties at issue: namely, that it was not intended to be binding until approved by both parties' attorneys and signed with their seals affixed thereto. He further argued that since this condition precedent had not been fulfilled, there could be no valid contract between them and thus no cause for action on either side; as such, he concluded that judgment should have been rendered in favor of neither party. In conclusion, Justice Field asserted his belief that contracts must always be interpreted strictly according to their terms and conditions if they are to remain enforceable under law - even when those terms may seem harsh or unfair - lest all contractual obligations become meaningless due to judicial interference with their plain meaning.