Paine v. Central Vermont Railroad Company was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1885. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Paine, and the defendant, Central Vermont Railroad Company, over a contract for the sale of a parcel of land. Paine had agreed to sell the land to the railroad company for a certain price, but the railroad company refused to pay the full amount. Paine then sued the railroad company for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the railroad company was liable for breach of contract. The Court found that the railroad company had failed to pay the full amount of the contract price, and that Paine was entitled to damages for the breach. The Court also held that the railroad company was liable for the costs of the lawsuit, including attorney's fees. The Court's decision in this case established that a party who breaches a contract is liable for damages and costs associated with the breach. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving breach of contract.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Paine v. Central Vermont Railroad Company, arguing that the majority's decision was wrongfully based on a misapplication of existing law. He argued that under the 1877 Act to Regulate Commerce, Congress had not intended to grant exclusive jurisdiction over interstate railroad disputes to federal courts; rather, it only meant for state and federal courts to have concurrent jurisdiction. Furthermore, he noted that while Congress had granted authority for certain matters related to railroads (such as safety regulations) exclusively to federal courts, this did not extend beyond those specific areas. As such, Justice Field concluded that since no express language existed granting exclusive jurisdiction over all cases involving interstate railroads solely within federal court systems - and because there were no other laws or precedents which could be used as justification - then states should retain their right of concurrent jurisdiction with regard to these types of cases.