Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Batchelor v. Brereton & Another

• 1884 • 112 U.S. 396 • Waite Court
In Batchelor v. Brereton & Another, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid. The contract in question was between a husband and wife, and it provided that the husband would pay the wife a certain sum of money in exchange for her relinquishing her right to alimony. The wife argued that the contract was invalid because it was against public policy. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid. The Court reasoned that the...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1884
Docket: 84
112 U.S. 396
5 S. Ct. 180
28 L. Ed. 748
1884 U.S. LEXIS 1892
Argued: Nov 14, 1884

Batchelor v. Brereton & Another

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Batchelor v. Brereton & Another, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid. The contract in question was between a husband and wife, and it provided that the husband would pay the wife a certain sum of money in exchange for her relinquishing her right to alimony. The wife argued that the contract was invalid because it was against public policy. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid. The Court reasoned that the contract was not against public policy because it was a voluntary agreement between two competent parties. Furthermore, the Court noted that the contract did not involve any illegal activity or fraud. The Court also noted that the contract was not against public policy because it did not involve any public interest. The Court concluded that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court held that the wife was not entitled to alimony because she had voluntarily relinquished her right to it. The Court also held that the husband was entitled to the money he had agreed to pay the wife in exchange for her relinquishing her right to alimony.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Batchelor v. Brereton & Another, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when one party had not received full payment for their services. The majority opinion held that since there was no evidence of fraud or mistake in the transaction, and since both parties were aware of what they were agreeing to at the time, then it should be enforced as written. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that even if there is no evidence of fraud or mistake in a contract dispute such as this one, courts must still consider other factors before enforcing it fully. He argued that equity demands consideration for any hardship suffered by either party due to an unequal exchange; thus he believed that some form of compensation should have been given to Batchelor despite his lack of proof regarding fraud or mistake on behalf of Brereton & Another.

Opinion written by Justice SBlatchford
Decided: Dec 01, 1884
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms