| No search history |
Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Carpentier v. Montgomery et al. was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1871. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Carpentier, had entered into a contract with the defendants, Montgomery et al., to purchase a steamboat for $2,000. Carpentier paid the full amount, but the defendants refused to deliver the boat. Carpentier then sued the defendants for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable, and that the defendants were liable for damages. The Court also held that the defendants had acted in bad faith by refusing to deliver the boat, and that they were liable for punitive damages. The Court awarded Carpentier $2,000 in compensatory damages and $1,000 in punitive damages. The Court's decision in this case established the principle that a contract is binding and enforceable, and that a party who breaches a contract is liable for damages. It also established the principle that a party who acts in bad faith may be liable for punitive damages.
In Carpentier v. Montgomery et al., the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by a non-resident against another non-resident in which the cause of action arose out of events that occurred outside of the state's borders. The majority opinion held that, since both parties were non-residents and no part of the transaction took place within its borders, it did not have jurisdiction over such an action. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that states should be able to exercise their power as sovereigns and extend their judicial authority beyond their own boundaries when necessary for justice to be done. He argued further that if states are unable to do so then they will become powerless in cases where one party is a resident and another is not; thus allowing injustice or fraudulence on behalf of those who reside elsewhere but still owe obligations under contracts made within its territory.