In Moodie v. The Ship Phoebe Anne, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case involving an alleged breach of contract between two parties. The plaintiff, Moodie, was a merchant from Jamaica who had contracted with the defendant ship's captain to transport goods from Jamaica to Philadelphia for sale in America. When the ship arrived in Philadelphia without any cargo on board, Moodie sued for damages and sought compensation for his losses due to non-delivery of goods. In its ruling, the court held that while there was no express agreement between both parties regarding delivery of goods at destination port or payment upon arrival at said port; nevertheless it found that under maritime law such implied terms were part and parcel of every contract made by sea captains transporting merchandise across oceans and thus liable for any loss suffered as result thereof. As such they ruled in favor of Moodie awarding him full compensation plus interest on his losses incurred due to non-delivery

In Moodie v. The Ship Phoebe Anne, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced even though it had been made in violation of an existing law. Justice Iredell wrote the dissenting opinion, arguing that contracts should not be invalidated simply because they violate laws which are deemed unconstitutional or otherwise void. He argued that if such contracts were rendered unenforceable, then individuals would have no incentive to comply with valid laws and regulations since their agreements would still remain binding regardless of any violations committed during their formation. Furthermore, he noted that this decision could lead to great injustice as innocent third-parties who relied on these contracts may suffer losses due to its invalidation without being able recompense from either party involved in making it. Ultimately, Justice Iredell concluded by stating his belief that courts should only intervene when necessary and refrain from interfering with private contractual arrangements unless absolutely required by law or public policy considerations