SECRIST v. GREEN was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1865. The dispute arose when Green, an Ohio resident, sold Secrist some horses that were later found to be diseased and unfit for use. Secrist sued Green for breach of warranty and sought damages from him as compensation for his losses due to the purchase of these horses. The Supreme Court held that while there had been a breach of warranty on behalf of Green, he could not be held liable because he did not have knowledge or notice at the time of sale regarding any defects with the horses; thus, it was determined that no damages should be awarded against him. Furthermore, since this transaction occurred before passage of Ohio's Statute on Sales which provided remedies in such cases involving warranties and misrepresentations made during sales transactions between parties, it was concluded that Secrist would have no legal recourse against Green under existing law at the time either.

In Secrist v. Green, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by citizens of one state against another in which the defendant resided in a different state. The majority opinion held that it did not have such jurisdiction and dismissed the case. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that under Article III of the Constitution, Congress has given federal courts exclusive original jurisdiction over all cases between citizens of different states; secondly, he argued that even if Congress had not done so explicitly through legislation or constitutional amendment, they would still be able to exercise such authority as part of their inherent power as established by common law principles and precedent. He concluded his dissent with an assertion that “the right should exist” for parties who are residents of different states to bring suit against each other before federal courts without having to resort to suing in separate state courts.