Jas. W. Finley v. Thomas M. Isett, William C. Brewster and Sage O. Butler was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1868. The case involved a dispute over a contract between Finley and the other three parties. Finley had contracted with Isett, Brewster and Butler to purchase a tract of land in the state of Indiana. Finley paid the purchase price in full, but the other three parties refused to convey the land to him. Finley then brought suit against the other three parties in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Indiana. The Circuit Court found in favor of Finley and ordered the other three parties to convey the land to him. The other three parties appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court, holding that the contract between Finley and the other three parties was valid and enforceable. The Court also held that the other three parties were liable for damages for their breach of the contract. The Court ordered the other three parties to convey the land to Finley and to pay him damages for their breach of the contract.

In the case of JAS. W. FINLEY v. THOMAS M. ISETT, WILLIAM C. BREWSTER AND SAGE O. BUTLER, Chief Justice Chase delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had misapplied the law and failed to consider certain facts relevant to Finley's claim for damages against Isett et al., who were responsible for his wrongful imprisonment due to their negligence in failing to properly investigate his innocence before charging him with a crime he did not commit. He noted that while it was true that Finley could not recover damages from those who wrongfully accused him if they acted without malice or gross negligence, this was not applicable here since there was evidence of both on behalf of Isett et al., as evidenced by their failure to make any effort whatsoever at investigating whether or not Finley actually committed the crime prior to bringing charges against him and thus depriving him of his liberty without cause or justification under color of law - an act which is clearly malicious and grossly negligent according to established legal precedent regarding such matters as well as common sense morality principles governing how people should treat one another regardless of circumstance or station in life.. Therefore, Chief Justice Chase concluded that justice demanded awarding Finley compensation for his suffering caused by these individuals' actions despite what the majority held otherwise