Seven Hickory v. Ellery was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1881. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a parcel of land. The plaintiff, Seven Hickory, had entered into a contract with the defendant, Ellery, to purchase a parcel of land for $1,000. Ellery had agreed to pay the taxes on the land, but failed to do so. As a result, the land was sold at a tax sale and Seven Hickory was unable to complete the purchase. Seven Hickory sued Ellery for breach of contract, arguing that Ellery had failed to fulfill his obligation to pay the taxes on the land. The Supreme Court held that Ellery was liable for breach of contract, as he had failed to fulfill his obligation to pay the taxes on the land. The Court also held that Seven Hickory was entitled to recover the amount of the taxes paid at the tax sale, as well as any other damages that may have been incurred as a result of the breach. The Court's decision in Seven Hickory v. Ellery established that a party who fails to fulfill their obligations under a contract is liable for breach of contract and may be held liable for any damages that may have been incurred as a result of the breach. This case is still cited today as an example of the legal principles of contract law.

In Seven Hickory v. Ellery, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a deed of land in New York had been validly executed and delivered. The majority opinion held that the deed was not valid because it lacked an essential element: delivery. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that there were sufficient facts to support a finding of delivery under New York law. He noted that while there may have been some ambiguity as to when or how delivery occurred, the evidence showed that all parties involved intended for the deed to be effective upon execution—and thus should be considered legally binding even without explicit proof of actual physical transfer between them. Furthermore, he pointed out that if such strict requirements were imposed on deeds then many would never become operative due to lack of clear evidence regarding their status at any given time; therefore, he concluded by asserting his belief in upholding contracts whenever possible so long as they are supported by reasonable inferences drawn from available facts and circumstances surrounding them.