O'Dowd v. Russell was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1871. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, O'Dowd, had entered into a contract with the defendant, Russell, to purchase a steamboat for $2,000. O'Dowd paid the full amount, but Russell refused to deliver the boat. O'Dowd then sued Russell for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court found that the contract was supported by consideration, meaning that both parties had given something of value in exchange for the other's promise. The Court also found that the contract was not void for lack of mutuality, meaning that both parties had an obligation to perform. The Court held that O'Dowd was entitled to damages for the breach of contract. The Court awarded O'Dowd the full amount of the purchase price, plus interest, as well as damages for the delay in delivery of the steamboat. The Court also held that O'Dowd was entitled to attorney's fees. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that O'Dowd was entitled to damages for the breach of contract and awarded him the full amount of the purchase price, plus interest, as well as damages for the delay in delivery of the steamboat. The Court also held that O'Dowd was entitled to attorney's fees.

In O'Dowd v. Russell, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties that had been partially performed could be enforced in court. The majority opinion held that it could not, as the statute of frauds required all contracts for land sales to be in writing and signed by both parties. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision on the grounds that partial performance should have been sufficient evidence of an agreement between the two parties. He argued that if one party had already begun performing their part of the bargain then they should not be denied relief simply because there was no written document outlining their agreement; instead, courts should look at other forms of proof such as testimony or circumstantial evidence when determining whether an oral contract has been made and is enforceable under law.