Hinckley v. Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Company was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1887. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Hinckley, and the defendant, Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Company, over a contract for the sale of iron ore. Hinckley had contracted to sell the ore to the company, but the company refused to accept the ore and refused to pay for it. Hinckley sued the company for breach of contract, and the case was heard by the Supreme Court. The Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable, and that the company was liable for breach of contract. The Court also held that the company was liable for damages, and that Hinckley was entitled to recover the full amount of the contract price. The Court's decision in Hinckley v. Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Company established the principle that a contract is binding and enforceable, and that a party who breaches a contract is liable for damages. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases, and it remains an important precedent in contract law.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Hinckley v. Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Company, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to established precedent and would lead to a dangerous expansion of corporate power. He argued that corporations were not natural persons and thus could not be held liable for false representations made by their agents or employees unless they had adopted such statements as their own. Furthermore, he noted that it was well-established law at the time of this case that a corporation could only be held responsible for its own acts; any act done by an agent on behalf of another person or entity did not bind the principal without express authority from them. Finally, Justice Field argued that if corporations were allowed to be held liable for misrepresentations made by their agents without proof of adoption or authorization, then no one would ever enter into contracts with them since there would always exist some risk of liability due to potential misstatements from those acting on behalf of the company.