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

Campbell v. Read

1864 • 69 U.S. 198 • Chase Court
In Campbell v. Read, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to determine whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when one party had died before it was fully performed. The plaintiff argued that his deceased father-in-law had entered into an agreement with him in which he promised to pay $2,000 for certain property and improvements made on it by the plaintiff's family. The defendant argued that since the father-in-law had passed away prior to fulfilling his obligations...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: 1864
69 U.S. 198
17 L. Ed. 779
1864 U.S. LEXIS 421

Campbell v. Read

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Campbell v. Read, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to determine whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when one party had died before it was fully performed. The plaintiff argued that his deceased father-in-law had entered into an agreement with him in which he promised to pay $2,000 for certain property and improvements made on it by the plaintiff's family. The defendant argued that since the father-in-law had passed away prior to fulfilling his obligations under the contract, there was no way for them to enforce its terms. After considering both sides' arguments, however, the court ultimately ruled in favor of enforcing the contract and awarded damages accordingly. In doing so they held that contracts are binding upon all parties regardless of death or other intervening events unless otherwise provided by law or stipulated within their terms.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Campbell v. Read, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over a case involving two citizens of different states. The majority opinion held that the state court did not have jurisdiction because it violated Article III of the Constitution which provides for federal courts to hear cases between citizens of different states. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that there is nothing in Article III which prohibits a state court from hearing such cases as long as both parties consent to it. He further noted that Congress has passed laws allowing for such suits in certain circumstances and thus concluded that if both parties agree then a state court should be able to exercise its power over them regardless of their citizenship status.

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