Fogg v. Blair was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 1883. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Fogg, had entered into a contract with the defendant, Blair, to purchase a steamboat for $2,000. Fogg paid the full amount, but Blair refused to deliver the boat. Fogg then sued Blair for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court found that the contract was supported by consideration, as Fogg had paid the full amount of the purchase price. The Court also found that the contract was not voidable due to any lack of capacity on the part of either party. The Court held that Blair was liable for breach of contract and ordered him to deliver the steamboat to Fogg. The decision in Fogg v. Blair established that a contract is valid and enforceable if it is supported by consideration and neither party lacks capacity. This case is still cited today as an example of the basic principles of contract law.

In the Supreme Court case of Fogg v. Blair, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had misconstrued the meaning of Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to include private corporations and individuals. He stated that this interpretation was not supported by either its language or legislative history, and would lead to an expansion of federal power far beyond what Congress intended when it passed the amendment. Furthermore, he noted that if such an expansive interpretation were accepted, then any state law could be overturned simply because it did not conform with some national standard set by Congress or even by a single judge on a circuit court. Ultimately, Justice Field concluded that allowing such broad interpretations would undermine states' rights and weaken their ability to protect citizens from oppressive legislation enacted at either state or federal levels.