Matthews v. Zane was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1807. The dispute involved two individuals, Matthews and Zane, who had entered into an agreement for the sale of land located in Maryland. When Matthews failed to make payment as agreed upon, Zane sued him for breach of contract and sought damages from him. In its ruling on this case, the Supreme Court held that when parties enter into a contract they are bound to perform their respective obligations under it according to its terms; if one party fails to do so then he or she is liable for any resulting damages caused by such failure. Furthermore, the court also ruled that where there is no express provision made within a contract regarding how disputes should be resolved between parties then those matters must be decided based on principles of equity established through common law precedent rather than statutory law or other sources of authority outside of common law jurisprudence.

In Matthews v. Zane, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed of land in Maryland that had been executed by two parties prior to the American Revolution was still valid after independence from Great Britain. The majority opinion held that it was not, as the original grantor no longer had any authority over the property due to sovereignty changes brought about by revolution and war. However, Justice Bushrod Washington dissented on this ruling and argued that since there were no laws or statutes passed during or immediately following independence which invalidated such deeds, they should remain valid until specifically declared otherwise by Congress or state legislatures. He further noted that if these deeds were rendered void without legislative action then it would be an unjust taking of private property rights without just compensation for those affected.