Sawyer v. Hoag, Assignee was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a debtor could be held liable for a debt that was assigned to another party. The case involved a dispute between two parties, Sawyer and Hoag, over a debt that had been assigned to Hoag by Sawyer. Sawyer argued that he was not liable for the debt because he had assigned it to Hoag. The Supreme Court held that a debtor could be held liable for a debt that was assigned to another party, even if the debtor had no knowledge of the assignment. The Court reasoned that the assignment of a debt was a voluntary act on the part of the debtor, and that the debtor should be held responsible for the consequences of that act. The Court also held that the assignee was not liable for the debt, as the assignee had no knowledge of the assignment. The Court concluded that the assignee was not liable for the debt, and that the debtor was solely responsible for the debt.

In Sawyer v. Hoag, Assignee, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a party could be held liable for debts incurred by another person in their name without their knowledge or consent. The majority opinion found that such liability did not exist and therefore the defendant should not be held responsible for the debt of another individual. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision arguing that there were certain circumstances where an individual could indeed be held liable for debts incurred by someone else in their name without their knowledge or consent. He argued that if a third-party had been misled into believing they were dealing with an authorized representative of the debtor then it would only make sense to hold them accountable as well since they had acted on false information provided to them by someone who appeared to have authority over those matters at hand. Ultimately, Justice Field's dissent was unsuccessful and his arguments failed to sway enough justices on the court resulting in a majority ruling against him and upholding prior precedent which stated no such liability existed under these circumstances