Reckendorfer v. Faber was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of breach of contract. The case involved two parties, Reckendorfer and Faber, who had entered into a contract for the sale of a piano. Faber had agreed to pay for the piano in installments, but failed to make the payments as agreed. Reckendorfer then sued Faber for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Faber was liable for breach of contract. The Court reasoned that a contract is a binding agreement between two parties, and that when one party fails to fulfill their obligations under the contract, the other party is entitled to damages. The Court also held that the damages should be equal to the amount of the contract, plus interest. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that Faber was liable for breach of contract and was required to pay Reckendorfer the amount of the contract, plus interest. This case established the principle that when one party fails to fulfill their obligations under a contract, the other party is entitled to damages.

In Reckendorfer v. Faber, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract for the sale of goods had been breached by one party or both parties. The majority opinion found that there had been no breach on either side and thus dismissed the case. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that while it may be true that neither party had technically breached their agreement, they were still in violation of its terms due to their failure to act in good faith when fulfilling their obligations under it. He further noted that even if there was not an explicit breach of contract, such behavior should still be considered wrongful as it undermines public confidence in contracts and encourages dishonesty among those who enter into them. As such, he concluded that some form of relief should have been granted to Reckendorfer despite his lack of technical proof regarding any actual breach by Faber.