Carter v. Burr, Administratrix is a United States Supreme Court case from 1885. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Carter, and the defendant, Burr, over the ownership of a piece of property. Carter claimed that he had purchased the property from Burr's husband, who had died without a will. Burr, however, argued that the property belonged to her as the administratrix of her husband's estate. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Carter, ruling that he had acquired the property through a valid purchase. The Court held that the purchase was valid because it had been made in good faith and for a valuable consideration. Furthermore, the Court found that Burr had no right to the property as the administratrix of her husband's estate, since the property had already been sold to Carter. The Court also noted that Burr had not taken any steps to protect her husband's estate from the sale. In conclusion, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Carter, finding that he had acquired the property through a valid purchase and that Burr had no right to the property as the administratrix of her husband's estate.

In the case of Carter v. Burr, Administratrix, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should not have reversed the decision of the Supreme Court of Louisiana. He believed that it was within their power to determine whether or not an act passed by Congress was constitutional and enforceable under state law. Furthermore, he argued that if Congress had intended for its acts to be binding on states then they would have included language explicitly stating so in those acts. As such, Justice Field concluded that since there were no explicit provisions granting authority to federal courts over state laws concerning inheritance rights and succession duties, it was inappropriate for them to interfere with decisions made by local courts regarding these matters.