In the case of Paving Company v. Mulford, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between a paving company and a city was valid. The paving company had contracted with the city to pave a street, but the city refused to pay the full amount due. The paving company sued the city for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court found that the contract was clear and unambiguous, and that the city had agreed to pay the full amount due. The Court also found that the city had not provided any evidence that the contract was invalid or unenforceable. The Court concluded that the paving company was entitled to the full amount due under the contract, and that the city was liable for breach of contract. The Court also held that the paving company was entitled to damages for the city's breach of contract.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Paving Company v. Mulford, arguing that the majority's decision was wrongfully decided and should be reversed. He argued that a contract between two parties is binding on both of them unless it can be shown to have been made under duress or fraud. In this case, he believed there was no evidence of either duress or fraud; therefore, the contract should stand as written and enforced by law. Furthermore, Justice Field noted that if one party were allowed to break their contractual obligations without consequence then all contracts would become meaningless because people could not rely upon them being honored in court. Therefore, he concluded that since there had been no showing of any wrongdoing on behalf of either party involved in this case then the lower court's ruling must stand and be upheld by the Supreme Court as well.