In this case, E.P. Calkin and Samuel Jones, trading under the firm of E.P. Calkin & Company (plaintiffs in error), sued James H Cocke for breach of contract regarding a shipment of cotton from Mobile to New Orleans that was damaged during transport due to negligence on behalf of the carrier's employees. The plaintiffs argued that they were entitled to damages as per their agreement with Cocke; however, he denied any responsibility for the damage caused by his employees' actions and refused payment accordingly. After hearing both sides’ arguments, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Cocke stating that since he had no direct control over his employee’s actions or knowledge about them at all times while transporting goods between ports, he could not be held liable for any damages incurred during transit regardless if it was due to negligence or otherwise on part of his workers/agents employed by him specifically for such purposes

In this case, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between E.P. Calkin and Company and James H. Cocke had been breached by either party. The majority opinion found that there had been no breach of contract on either side, but Justice McLean dissented from the majority opinion in his separate opinion. He argued that while it may be true that neither party had committed an act which would constitute a breach of contract, he believed that Cocke's failure to pay for goods purchased constituted such a breach as defined by law and should have resulted in damages being awarded to Calkin and Company for their losses due to nonpayment. Furthermore, he argued that if one party fails to perform their obligations under the terms of the agreement then they are liable for any resulting damage or loss suffered by another party as long as those damages were foreseeable at the time of entering into said agreement; thus making them responsible even without having performed any specific act constituting a breach of contract according to legal definitions thereof