Pierce v. Turner was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1809. The dispute arose when Thomas Pierce, an executor of his father's estate, sold some land to James Turner without informing him that he had previously mortgaged it to another party. When the mortgagee sued for payment on the debt, Turner sought compensation from Pierce for failing to disclose this information prior to sale. The court held that although there was no express contract between them regarding disclosure of such facts, Pierce had acted negligently and thus owed damages to Turner as a result of his breach of duty towards him as purchaser. This decision established precedent whereby sellers must exercise reasonable care in disclosing material facts about property they are selling or risk being liable for any losses incurred by buyers due to their failure do so.

In the case of Pierce v. Turner, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should not have granted an appeal to the defendant. He reasoned that since there was no dispute between parties regarding facts or law, and since both sides had agreed to abide by a jury's decision on damages, it would be inappropriate for the court to intervene at this stage. Furthermore, Marshall noted that if either party felt aggrieved by any part of the verdict they could seek relief from an appellate court after judgment has been entered into record. In conclusion, Chief Justice Marshall believed that granting an appeal in this situation would set a dangerous precedent and undermine public confidence in judicial proceedings as well as interfere with established legal principles governing appeals.