Ensminger v. Powers & Wife was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a husband and wife could be held jointly liable for a debt incurred by the husband. The case was brought by Ensminger, a creditor of the husband, who sought to collect a debt from the wife as well as the husband. The Supreme Court held that the wife could not be held liable for the debt, as she had not given her consent to the transaction. The Court reasoned that the wife had no knowledge of the debt and had not given her consent to the transaction, and thus could not be held liable for the debt. The Court further held that the husband was the only one liable for the debt, as he was the one who had entered into the transaction. This case established the principle that a wife cannot be held liable for a debt incurred by her husband without her consent.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in this case. He argued that the court should not have granted a writ of error because it was clear from the record that there had been no final judgment entered by the lower court. The Supreme Court's jurisdiction is limited to reviewing judgments, and since none had been rendered, they could not review any errors made by the lower court. Furthermore, Justice Field noted that even if a judgment had been entered, he would still dissent as he believed there were substantial questions of fact which needed to be determined before an appeal could be heard on its merits. He concluded his opinion by noting that while it may seem harsh for litigants to suffer due to procedural technicalities such as this one, these rules are necessary in order for courts to function properly and efficiently.