Oregon Improvement Company v. Excelsior Coal Company was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1910. The case involved a dispute between two coal companies over the rights to a coal mine in Oregon. The Oregon Improvement Company (OIC) had leased the mine from the Excelsior Coal Company (ECC) in 1906. The lease agreement stated that OIC would pay ECC a royalty of one-eighth of the coal mined from the mine. In 1908, OIC stopped paying the royalty, claiming that the coal mined was of a lower quality than what was specified in the lease agreement. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of ECC, finding that OIC had breached the lease agreement by failing to pay the royalty. The Court held that the lease agreement was valid and enforceable, and that OIC was liable for the unpaid royalties. The Court also held that OIC was not entitled to any compensation for the lower quality of the coal mined, as this was not specified in the lease agreement. The Court's decision established that parties to a contract are bound by the terms of the agreement, and that any disputes must be resolved in accordance with the terms of the agreement.

In the case of Oregon Improvement Company v. Excelsior Coal Company, Justice Brewer wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority’s decision was wrong and should be reversed. He believed that the contract between Oregon Improvement Company and Excelsior Coal Company did not give either party an absolute right to terminate it at any time without cause or notice. Instead, he argued that both parties had agreed to certain terms when they entered into their agreement, including a provision for termination only after reasonable notice had been given by one party to another. Furthermore, Justice Brewer stated that since there was no evidence of fraud or misrepresentation on either side regarding this particular clause in their contract, then it should be enforced as written and neither party could unilaterally decide to end the agreement without providing proper notification first. In conclusion, Justice Brewer felt strongly that if contracts are going to have any meaning whatsoever then they must be upheld according to their original intent; otherwise all agreements become meaningless pieces of paper with no real legal standing behind them.