John D. Amis and Nathan Smith were involved in a dispute that was brought before the United States Supreme Court. At issue was whether or not Smith had breached his contract with Amis by failing to pay him for goods he had delivered as part of their agreement. The court found that there was sufficient evidence to prove that Smith did breach the contract, and thus ordered him to pay damages accordingly. In its ruling, the court also noted that it is important for parties entering into contracts to be aware of all terms and conditions so they can understand what they are agreeing upon prior to signing any documents. This case serves as an example of how courts will enforce contractual agreements when one party fails to fulfill their obligations under such an agreement.

In the case of John D. Amis v. Nathan Smith, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced if it had been made in violation of an existing state law. The majority opinion held that such contracts were not enforceable and thus denied relief to Amis who sought damages for breach of contract against Smith. However, Justice McLean dissented from this decision arguing that while he did not condone violations of state laws, denying enforcement would lead to injustice as well as encourage individuals to break their contractual obligations with impunity since they knew there would be no consequences for doing so. He argued instead that courts should have discretion when deciding cases involving contracts made in violation of state laws and should consider all relevant facts before making a ruling on them rather than simply refusing enforcement outright without any consideration whatsoever for the circumstances surrounding each particular case.