Henry S. Foote, plaintiff in error, brought a case against Cyrus W. Egery and Joseph F. Smith for the recovery of damages resulting from an alleged breach of contract by the defendants to purchase certain lands owned by Foote at a specified price within a given time frame. The Supreme Court held that there was sufficient evidence presented to support the jury's finding that there had been an agreement between Foote and Egery & Smith as well as their failure to comply with its terms; however, it also found that no actual damage had resulted from this breach since Foote still retained title to his land after expiration of the agreed-upon period for payment and could have sold it elsewhere if he so chose. As such, they reversed the judgment below awarding damages on behalf of Foote and remanded with instructions for dismissal without prejudice due to lack of proof showing any injury or loss suffered by him as result of defendants' noncompliance with their contractual obligations.

In the case of Henry S. Foote v. Cyrus W. Egery and Joseph F. Smith, the dissenting opinion was that a state court had no authority to issue an injunction against a federal officer in order to prevent him from performing his official duties under federal law, even if those duties were deemed unconstitutional by the state court or its citizens. The dissent argued that such action would be tantamount to nullifying a valid act of Congress and thus violate Article III of the Constitution which grants exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving laws passed by Congress to courts established under it's authority alone - namely, United States Supreme Court justices sitting as circuit judges for their respective circuits or district courts within them. Furthermore, any attempt by states to interfere with acts authorized by Congress could lead down a slippery slope where each state is allowed unchecked power over all matters pertaining thereto; this would ultimately undermine our nation's system of dual sovereignty between states and national government as outlined in our founding documents and threaten civil liberties across America