Kennedy v. Brent was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1810. The dispute arose when Thomas Kennedy, who had purchased land from William Brent, sued for damages after discovering that the title to the property was not valid due to an earlier deed of trust given by Brent's father-in-law. The court found that Kennedy had relied on representations made by Brent and his wife regarding their ownership of the property and thus held them liable for any losses suffered as a result of their misrepresentation. Furthermore, they ruled that even though there were no written documents or contracts between Kennedy and Brent concerning this transaction, it did not absolve them from liability since verbal agreements are still legally binding under common law principles. Ultimately, this decision established precedent which has been used ever since to hold individuals accountable for false statements made during real estate transactions regardless if those statements are written or oral in nature.

Justice Livingston delivered the dissenting opinion in Kennedy v. Brent, arguing that the majority's decision was inconsistent with prior precedent and would lead to a dangerous expansion of judicial power. He argued that it was not within the court's authority to grant relief for an alleged breach of contract when no legal remedy had been provided by statute or common law. Furthermore, he noted that if such a remedy were available through equity courts, then those courts should be allowed to decide on its merits rather than having their jurisdiction usurped by this Court. In conclusion, Justice Livingston warned against allowing "the judiciary [to] become so powerful as even indirectly to control legislation."