James Moore was the defendant in a case brought before the US Supreme Court. He had sued The President, Directors and Company of the Bank of Columbia (the defendants) for failing to pay him money owed from an earlier transaction. Moore argued that he should be paid interest on this debt as well as damages due to their failure to pay him promptly. The court ruled against Moore, finding that his claim for interest was not valid under existing law and that he could not receive damages because there were no legal provisions allowing them at the time. Ultimately, they found in favor of the defendants and dismissed Moore's claims with prejudice.

In the case of James Moore v. The President, Directors and Company of the Bank of Columbia, Moore argued that he had a right to recover damages from the bank for their failure to pay him money due on an endorsed note. The majority opinion held that since there was no evidence presented in court as to whether or not Moore had actually received payment from any other source, his claim could not be sustained. However, Justice Story dissented with this ruling and argued that it should have been up to the defendants (the Bank) to prove they were discharged by some other means than paying out cash; otherwise they would be liable for damages if found guilty. He further stated that even though there may have been insufficient proof presented in court regarding payments made by third parties, such evidence should still be considered when determining liability against a defendant who has failed to discharge its debt obligations according to contract law principles.