Smythe v. Fiske was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a contract between two parties was valid. The case involved a dispute between two parties, Smythe and Fiske, over a contract for the sale of a piece of land. Fiske had agreed to purchase the land from Smythe for a certain sum of money, but Smythe later refused to accept the payment and instead demanded a higher price. Fiske then sued Smythe for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract between the two parties was valid and enforceable. The Court found that the contract was supported by consideration, meaning that both parties had given something of value in exchange for the other's promise. The Court also found that the contract was not void for lack of consideration, as Smythe had argued. The Court held that the contract was binding and enforceable, and that Fiske was entitled to damages for breach of contract. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the contract between Smythe and Fiske was valid and enforceable, and that Fiske was entitled to damages for breach of contract. The Court's decision established that consideration is necessary for a contract to be valid and enforceable, and that a contract cannot be voided for lack of consideration.

In Smythe v. Fiske, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when it had been made in violation of an existing state law. The majority opinion held that the contract was not enforceable due to its illegality under state law and that any rights or obligations created by such contracts were void. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that while states have the power to regulate certain areas of commerce within their borders, they do not have authority over private contracts between individuals unless those contracts are contrary to public policy or morals. He argued further that since there is no evidence showing this particular contract violated either public policy or morality, it should be upheld as valid and binding on both parties despite being illegal under state law.