Burnhisel v. Firman, Assignee was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a debtor could be held liable for a debt that was assigned to a third party. The case involved a debtor, Burnhisel, who had assigned a debt to a third party, Firman, who was acting as an assignee. The Supreme Court held that the debtor could not be held liable for the debt, as the assignment of the debt to the third party had extinguished the debt. The Court reasoned that the assignment of the debt to the third party had the effect of transferring the debt from the debtor to the third party, and thus the debtor was no longer liable for the debt. The Court also held that the assignee was not liable for the debt, as the assignee had not assumed any liability for the debt. The Court concluded that the assignee was only entitled to the amount of the debt that was assigned to them, and that the debtor was not liable for any additional amount. The Court's decision in this case established that a debtor cannot be held liable for a debt that has been assigned to a third party.

In Burnhisel v. Firman, Assignee, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a judgment obtained in one state could be enforced against property located in another state. The majority opinion held that it could not; however, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that such judgments should be enforceable across states. He reasoned that since the Constitution of the United States had created a single nation with uniform laws throughout its territories, there should be no impediment to enforcing judgments between states as long as they were validly obtained within their own jurisdiction. Furthermore, he noted that allowing for enforcement of these judgments would promote justice and fairness by ensuring creditors are able to recover what is owed them regardless of where their debtor's assets may lie.