Smith v. Adsit was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1872. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a horse. The plaintiff, Smith, had agreed to purchase a horse from the defendant, Adsit, for $100. Smith paid Adsit $50 as a down payment and Adsit delivered the horse to Smith. Smith then refused to pay the remaining $50, claiming that the horse was not of the quality that Adsit had promised. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Adsit, finding that Smith had accepted the horse and was therefore obligated to pay the remaining $50. The Court held that Smith had accepted the horse by taking possession of it and that Adsit had fulfilled his part of the contract by delivering the horse. The Court also noted that Smith had not made any effort to return the horse or to seek a refund from Adsit. As a result, the Court found that Smith was liable for the remaining $50.

In Smith v. Adsit, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract between two parties could be enforced if it had been made without consideration. The majority opinion held that the contract was valid and enforceable despite there being no consideration given by either party. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision on the grounds that contracts must have some form of consideration in order to be legally binding and enforceable under law. He argued that while an agreement may still exist between two parties even when there is no exchange of value or benefit, such agreements are not considered contracts because they lack any legal effect or consequence for failing to fulfill their terms. Furthermore, he noted that allowing such agreements would open up opportunities for fraud and abuse as people could make promises without having any intention of fulfilling them since they would not face any consequences for doing so.