Owens v. Hanney was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1815. The dispute involved two individuals, Owens and Hanney, who had entered into an agreement for the sale of land located in Kentucky. Owens claimed that he had paid all of his obligations under the contract but that Hanney refused to convey title to him as agreed upon. In its decision, the court held that when parties enter into a contract they are bound by it and must fulfill their respective duties according to its terms or face legal consequences if they fail to do so. The court found in favor of Owens and ordered Hanney to comply with his contractual obligations and transfer title over the property as promised or pay damages for breach of contract.

In Owens v. Hanney, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over a case involving citizens of different states. The majority opinion held that it did not have such jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal. However, in his dissenting opinion Justice Johnson argued that the Constitution gave Congress exclusive power to regulate commerce between states but did not take away from individual states their right to exercise judicial authority over cases arising within their own borders. He further argued that if any party felt aggrieved by an unjust decision made by a state court they could always seek redress through federal courts or other means provided for under federal law. Therefore, he concluded that since this particular case involved two citizens of different states who were both present in one state when the dispute arose, then it was proper for its courts to hear and decide upon it without interference from Congress or any other body outside of its own boundaries.