In the case of Home of the Friendless v. Rouse, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a charitable organization had the right to sue for damages caused by a breach of contract. The Home of the Friendless was a charitable organization that provided shelter and care for the elderly and destitute. The organization had entered into a contract with Rouse, a contractor, to build a new wing of the Home. Rouse failed to complete the work as agreed, and the Home of the Friendless sued for damages. The Supreme Court held that the Home of the Friendless had the right to sue for damages. The Court reasoned that the Home of the Friendless was a legal entity and was therefore entitled to the same rights and privileges as any other legal entity. The Court also noted that the Home of the Friendless was a charitable organization and that it was in the public interest to protect such organizations from harm. The Court's decision in Home of the Friendless v. Rouse established that charitable organizations have the right to sue for damages caused by a breach of contract. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases and has been used to protect the rights of charitable organizations.

In the case of Home of the Friendless v. Rouse, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion that argued against the majority's decision to uphold an act passed by Congress in 1867 which allowed for individuals to be appointed as guardians over minors and other persons who were unable to care for themselves. He believed that this was an unconstitutional delegation of power from Congress to private citizens, since it violated Article I Section 8 Clause 17 of the Constitution which states that only Congress has authority over such matters. Furthermore, he argued that allowing these appointments would lead to corruption and abuse due to lack of oversight or accountability on behalf of those appointed as guardians. Ultimately, Justice Field concluded his dissent by arguing that if such powers are necessary then they should be granted directly by Congress rather than delegated out through private citizens with no checks or balances in place.