In Campbell v. Ranki, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable. 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 each month for the rest of her life. The husband had failed to make the payments, and the wife sued him for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court noted that the contract was not against public policy, and that it was not contrary to any law or statute. The Court also noted that the contract was not unconscionable, and that it was not against the interests of either party. The Court concluded that the contract was valid and enforceable, and that the husband was liable for breach of contract.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Campbell v. Ranki, arguing that the majority's decision was wrongfully decided and should be reversed. He argued that a contract between two parties is binding on both of them and cannot be unilaterally changed by one party without consent from the other. In this case, he believed that Mrs. Ranki had entered into an agreement with Mr. Campbell to pay him $2,000 for his services as her agent; however, she later refused to make payment after receiving benefit from his work due to her own negligence in not properly executing certain documents related to their agreement before they were needed for use in court proceedings involving another matter entirely unrelated to their contract or its performance. Justice Field concluded that if Mrs. Ranki had been diligent enough with regard to those documents then there would have been no need for Mr. Campbell's services at all and thus she could not now refuse payment simply because it was convenient for her financially given the circumstances of this particular situation - especially since it was clear from evidence presented during trial that Mr