Ritchie v. Franklin County was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a county could be held liable for damages caused by a county employee. The case arose when a county employee, while performing his duties, negligently caused a fire that destroyed the plaintiff's property. The plaintiff sued the county for damages, arguing that the county was liable for the employee's negligence. The Supreme Court held that the county could not be held liable for the employee's negligence. The Court reasoned that the county was not responsible for the employee's actions, as the employee was acting in his official capacity and was not acting as an agent of the county. The Court further reasoned that the county was not liable for the employee's negligence because the county had not authorized or ratified the employee's actions. The Court's decision in Ritchie v. Franklin County established that a county cannot be held liable for the negligence of its employees unless the county has authorized or ratified the employee's actions. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases and has become an important precedent in the area of governmental liability.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Ritchie v. Franklin County, arguing that the majority had erred in its interpretation of a state statute. He argued that the Court should have deferred to Ohio's Supreme Court on matters of interpreting state law and noted that it was not necessary for them to decide this case as there were no federal questions at issue. Furthermore, he contended that even if they did need to interpret the statute, their decision would be wrong because it contradicted both prior decisions by Ohio courts and long-standing principles of equity jurisprudence which held that an individual could not be deprived of property without due process or just compensation. Finally, Justice Field pointed out how this ruling would create a dangerous precedent where individuals could lose their rights without any legal recourse available to them since they had already been denied access to justice by being barred from suing in court.