In M'Ferrran v. Taylor and Massie, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case concerning an alleged breach of contract between two parties. The plaintiff, M’Ferrran, had entered into a contract with defendants Taylor and Massie to purchase goods from them at a certain price. However, when it came time for payment, they refused to accept it unless he paid more than what was agreed upon in the original agreement. In response to this action by the defendants, M’Ferrran filed suit against them seeking damages for their refusal to honor their contractual obligations. The court ultimately found that there was indeed a valid contract between both parties and that Taylor and Massie were liable for breaching it as they had failed to fulfill its terms without just cause or excuse. As such, they were ordered by the court to pay damages accordingly

In M'Ferrran v. Taylor and Massie, Chief Justice Marshall wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should not have dismissed the case without hearing it on its merits. He believed that there was enough evidence to suggest that the defendant had committed fraud against the plaintiff, and thus deserved to be heard before any judgement could be made. Furthermore, Marshall noted that if this decision were allowed to stand then it would set a dangerous precedent of allowing defendants accused of fraud or other serious crimes to avoid being held accountable for their actions simply by failing to appear in court when summoned. As such, he concluded his dissent by urging justices not only in this case but also future cases involving similar circumstances should consider all available evidence before making any judgements so as not to allow criminals an easy way out of responsibility for their wrongdoings.