Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Feibelman v. Packard And Another

• 1883 • 109 U.S. 421 • Waite Court
Feibelman v. Packard and Another was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a contract between two parties was valid. The case involved a dispute between two parties, Feibelman and Packard, over a contract for the sale of a piece of real estate. Feibelman had agreed to purchase the property from Packard, but Packard refused to transfer the deed to Feibelman. Feibelman then sued Packard for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract between the...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1883
Docket: 103
109 U.S. 421
3 S. Ct. 289
27 L. Ed. 984
1883 U.S. LEXIS 984

Feibelman v. Packard And Another

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Feibelman v. Packard and Another was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a contract between two parties was valid. The case involved a dispute between two parties, Feibelman and Packard, over a contract for the sale of a piece of real estate. Feibelman had agreed to purchase the property from Packard, but Packard refused to transfer the deed to Feibelman. Feibelman then sued Packard for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract between the two parties was valid and enforceable. The Court found that the contract was supported by consideration, meaning that both parties had given something of value in exchange for the agreement. The Court also found that the contract was not void for lack of consideration, as Packard had argued. The Court held that the contract was binding on both parties and that Packard was obligated to transfer the deed to Feibelman. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the contract between Feibelman and Packard was valid and enforceable. The Court found that the contract was supported by consideration and that Packard was obligated to transfer the deed to Feibelman.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Feibelman v. Packard and Another, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when it had been entered into without consideration. The majority opinion held that there was no consideration for the contract in question and thus it could not be enforced. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision on the grounds that although there may have been no actual monetary or other tangible form of consideration given by one party to another, an agreement made with good faith intentions should still be enforceable under law as long as both parties were aware of their obligations under said agreement. He argued that if such agreements are not upheld then individuals will lack confidence in entering into contracts which do not involve any exchange of money or goods but instead rely solely upon mutual trust and understanding between them.

Opinion written by Justice SMatthews
Decided: Dec 03, 1883
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms