Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Phillips v. Payne

• 1875 • 92 U.S. 130 • Waite Court
Phillips v. Payne is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1875. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Phillips, had contracted to purchase the steamboat from the defendant, Payne, for a certain sum of money. Phillips had paid the agreed-upon sum, but Payne refused to deliver the steamboat. Phillips then sued Payne for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Payne was liable for breach of contract....Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1875
Docket: 186
92 U.S. 130
23 L. Ed. 649
1875 U.S. LEXIS 1738
Argued: Mar 24, 1876

Phillips v. Payne

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Phillips v. Payne is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1875. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Phillips, had contracted to purchase the steamboat from the defendant, Payne, for a certain sum of money. Phillips had paid the agreed-upon sum, but Payne refused to deliver the steamboat. Phillips then sued Payne for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Payne was liable for breach of contract. The Court reasoned that Payne had accepted the money and had not delivered the steamboat, thus breaching the contract. The Court also held that Phillips was entitled to damages for the breach of contract. The Court noted that the damages should be equal to the amount of money that Phillips had paid for the steamboat, plus any additional costs that Phillips had incurred as a result of the breach. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that Payne was liable for breach of contract and that Phillips was entitled to damages for the breach. The Court ordered Payne to pay Phillips the amount of money that Phillips had paid for the steamboat, plus any additional costs that Phillips had incurred as a result of the breach.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Phillips v. Payne, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to established precedent and would lead to a dangerous expansion of federal power. He argued that Congress had no authority under the Constitution to pass legislation granting citizenship rights or privileges based on race or color, as it did with this case involving an African American woman who sought naturalization after marrying a white man. Field further contended that such laws were not only unconstitutional but also violated fundamental principles of equality by creating different classes of citizens based solely on their skin color. Finally, he warned against allowing Congress too much leeway in determining which individuals should be granted citizenship rights and privileges since it could easily become abused for political gain or other nefarious purposes.

Opinion written by Justice NHSwayne
Decided: Apr 17, 1876
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms