In County of Warren v. Marcy, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a county could be held liable for damages caused by a defective bridge. The plaintiff, Marcy, had been injured when his horse and wagon fell through a bridge that had been built by the county. Marcy argued that the county was liable for his injuries because it had failed to properly maintain the bridge. The Supreme Court held that the county was not liable for Marcy's injuries. The Court reasoned that the county had not been negligent in its maintenance of the bridge, and that it had no duty to inspect the bridge or to repair it. The Court also noted that the county had not been aware of the defect in the bridge prior to Marcy's accident. The Court concluded that the county was not liable for Marcy's injuries, and that Marcy could not recover damages from the county. The Court's decision established that a county is not liable for damages caused by a defective bridge unless it had been negligent in its maintenance of the bridge.

Justice Field wrote the dissenting opinion in County of Warren v. Marcy, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to established law and precedent. He argued that a state cannot be sued without its consent, as it is sovereign over its own territory and has exclusive jurisdiction over matters within its borders. Furthermore, he noted that Congress had not passed any legislation allowing states to be sued by individuals or corporations for damages caused by their actions. As such, Justice Field concluded that the Court should have dismissed Marcy’s suit against Warren County on jurisdictional grounds rather than ruling on the merits of her claim. He further stated his belief that if Congress wished to allow suits against states for damages caused by their actions then they would need to pass appropriate legislation authorizing such suits before any court could consider them valid claims under federal law.