Stark v. Starrs was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1867. The case involved a dispute between two parties over the ownership of a piece of land in the state of Ohio. The plaintiff, Stark, claimed that he had purchased the land from the defendant, Starrs, and that Starrs had failed to deliver the deed to the property. Starrs argued that he had never sold the land to Stark and that Stark had no legal right to the property. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Stark, ruling that Starrs had indeed sold the land to Stark and that Stark was entitled to the deed. The Court held that Starrs had made a binding contract with Stark and that Stark was entitled to the deed as a result. The Court also held that Stark was entitled to damages for the delay in receiving the deed. This decision established the principle that a contract is binding even if the deed is not delivered.

In the case of Stark v. Starrs, Chief Justice Chase delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had failed to consider certain facts and evidence presented by both parties. He noted that while it was true that there were two separate contracts between the parties, one for goods and another for services, they were not distinct from each other as claimed by the majority. Rather, he argued that these two agreements should be considered together since they arose out of a single transaction with mutual obligations on both sides. Furthermore, Chief Justice Chase pointed out how this agreement was made under duress due to an impending bankruptcy filing by Stark against Starr; thus making any contract unenforceable unless ratified or approved afterwards according to law. As such, Chief Justice Chase concluded his dissent stating that based on all available evidence and facts presented before them at trial - including those related to duress - no valid contract could have been formed between these two parties without ratification or approval after its formation