Brown & Others v. Davis & Others is a landmark United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1886. The case involved a dispute between two parties over the ownership of a piece of land in the state of Mississippi. The plaintiffs, Brown & Others, argued that they had a valid deed to the land, while the defendants, Davis & Others, argued that they had a valid deed to the same land. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with the plaintiffs, ruling that the deed held by Brown & Others was valid and that the defendants had no legal claim to the land. The Court held that the deed held by Brown & Others was valid because it had been properly executed and recorded in accordance with the laws of Mississippi. The Court also held that the defendants had no legal claim to the land because they had failed to prove that they had a valid deed to the land. The decision in Brown & Others v. Davis & Others established an important precedent in the area of property law. The Court's ruling established that a deed must be properly executed and recorded in order to be valid, and that a party must be able to prove that they have a valid deed in order to have a legal claim to a piece of property. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving property disputes.

In Brown & Others v. Davis & Others, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when it had been made in violation of an existing state law. The majority opinion held that the contract should not be enforced due to its illegality under state law. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that while contracts made in violation of state laws are generally unenforceable, there may be exceptions where enforcing such a contract would serve justice and fairness better than allowing one party to benefit from their own wrongdoing or negligence. He further noted that if courts were allowed to enforce contracts even when they violated existing laws, then people would have more confidence in entering into agreements knowing they will still receive protection even if something goes wrong during performance of the agreement.