James Marks brought a case against Michael Dickson and Elizabeth M. Dickson to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1857. The dispute was over an alleged breach of contract between Marks and the two defendants, who had agreed to pay him for his services as a surveyor but failed to do so. In their defense, they argued that there was no valid contract because it lacked consideration on both sides; however, this argument was rejected by the court due to evidence presented that showed consideration from both parties. Ultimately, after reviewing all evidence presented before them, the court ruled in favor of James Marks and ordered Michael Dickson and Elizabeth M. Dickson to pay him for his services as promised in their agreement with him.

In the case of James Marks v. Michael Dickson and Elizabeth M. Dickson, the dissenting opinion argued that a contract between two parties should be enforced as written unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise. The majority opinion had held that an oral agreement was sufficient to modify a prior written contract, but Justice Catron disagreed with this interpretation of the law. He argued that contracts are binding documents which must be followed in their entirety or not at all; any modifications made after signing must also be documented in writing for them to have legal effect. Furthermore, he noted that allowing verbal agreements to supersede existing contracts would lead to uncertainty and confusion among those involved in contractual disputes since it could open up opportunities for fraud or misrepresentation by one party over another without proper documentation being available as proof of such changes having been made.