Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Morgan v. Campbell, Assignee

• 1874 • 89 U.S. 381 • Waite Court
Morgan v. Campbell, Assignee is a United States Supreme Court case from 1878. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Morgan, had contracted to sell the steamboat to the defendant, Campbell, who had assigned the contract to another party. Morgan argued that the assignment was invalid and that he was still entitled to payment from Campbell. The Supreme Court held that the assignment was valid and that Morgan was not entitled to...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1874
Docket: 732
89 U.S. 381
22 L. Ed. 796
1874 U.S. LEXIS 1276

Morgan v. Campbell, Assignee

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Morgan v. Campbell, Assignee is a United States Supreme Court case from 1878. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Morgan, had contracted to sell the steamboat to the defendant, Campbell, who had assigned the contract to another party. Morgan argued that the assignment was invalid and that he was still entitled to payment from Campbell. The Supreme Court held that the assignment was valid and that Morgan was not entitled to payment from Campbell. The Court reasoned that the assignment was valid because it was made in good faith and for a valuable consideration. Furthermore, the Court held that the assignment was binding on Morgan because he had accepted the consideration and had not objected to the assignment. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the assignment was valid and that Morgan was not entitled to payment from Campbell. The Court reasoned that the assignment was valid and binding on Morgan because it was made in good faith and for a valuable consideration, and Morgan had accepted the consideration and had not objected to the assignment.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Morgan v. Campbell, Assignee. He argued that a contract between two parties should be enforced as written and not interpreted by courts to mean something else than what was agreed upon by both parties. In this case, the plaintiff had loaned money to the defendant with an agreement that it would be paid back with interest at a certain rate over time. The court majority held that because of inflationary pressures on currency during this period, they could reduce the amount of interest due from what was originally agreed upon in order for justice to prevail; however Justice Field disagreed and argued that such action constituted judicial legislation which he believed violated separation of powers principles established under our Constitution. He further noted how allowing courts to interpret contracts differently than their plain language could lead down a slippery slope where any contract can be subjectively reinterpreted according to changing economic conditions or other external factors beyond those contemplated when it was first entered into by both parties - thus undermining contractual certainty and predictability essential for commerce and business transactions within our society today

Opinion written by Justice DDavis
Decided: Mar 01, 1875
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms