Osterberg v. Union Trust Company is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1876. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Osterberg, and the defendant, Union Trust Company, over a promissory note. Osterberg had given the note to Union Trust Company in exchange for a loan. The note was secured by a mortgage on Osterberg's property. When Osterberg failed to make payments on the note, Union Trust Company sought to foreclose on the mortgage. Osterberg argued that the foreclosure was invalid because the note had been given to Union Trust Company without consideration. Osterberg argued that the note was given as a gift and not in exchange for a loan. The Supreme Court disagreed and held that the note was given in exchange for a loan and was therefore valid. The Court also held that the foreclosure was valid and that Union Trust Company was entitled to foreclose on the mortgage. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the note was given in exchange for a loan and that the foreclosure was valid. The Court also held that Union Trust Company was entitled to foreclose on the mortgage.

In Osterberg v. Union Trust Company, the Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a contract between two parties could be enforced even if it had been made in violation of state law. The majority opinion held that the contract should not be enforced because it violated public policy and thus was voidable by either party. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that contracts are generally enforceable regardless of any violations of state laws or public policies unless they involve matters which are so clearly wrong as to shock the conscience or offend fundamental principles of justice. He further argued that since there were no such considerations present in this case, enforcing the contract would not violate any moral principle and therefore should have been allowed to stand despite its illegality under state law.