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

Bronson v. Kimpton

• 1869 • 75 U.S. 444 • Chase Court
Bronson v. Kimpton was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1869. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Bronson, had contracted with the defendant, Kimpton, to purchase a steamboat for $2,000. Kimpton had agreed to deliver the boat to Bronson, but failed to do so. Bronson then sued Kimpton for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Kimpton was liable for breach of contract. The Court reasoned that...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 Chase Court
Term: 1869
75 U.S. 444
19 L. Ed. 433
1868 U.S. LEXIS 1121
Argued: Nov 23, 1869

Bronson v. Kimpton

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Bronson v. Kimpton was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1869. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Bronson, had contracted with the defendant, Kimpton, to purchase a steamboat for $2,000. Kimpton had agreed to deliver the boat to Bronson, but failed to do so. Bronson then sued Kimpton for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Kimpton was liable for breach of contract. The Court reasoned that the contract was valid and enforceable, and that Kimpton had failed to fulfill his obligations under the contract. The Court also held that Bronson was entitled to damages for the breach of contract. The decision in Bronson v. Kimpton established that a contract is binding and enforceable, and that a party who breaches a contract is liable for damages. This case is still cited today as an example of the enforceability of contracts.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Bronson v. Kimpton, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced if it had been made in violation of a state law prohibiting such contracts. The majority opinion held that the contract was unenforceable because it violated public policy and thus should not be recognized by the court. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Field argued that while he agreed with the majority's conclusion on public policy grounds, he believed that there were other reasons why this particular contract should have been enforced despite its illegality under state law. He argued that since both parties had acted in good faith and relied upon each other’s promises when entering into their agreement, they should not suffer any penalty for doing so; instead, they ought to receive whatever benefit or detriment resulted from their bargain as originally intended. Furthermore, Field maintained that enforcing contracts which violate laws is sometimes necessary in order to prevent injustice and protect individuals' rights against oppressive government action or arbitrary interference with private agreements

Opinion written by Justice SPChase
Decided: Nov 29, 1869
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