In Taylor v. Walton and Hundly, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case concerning an alleged breach of contract between two parties in Kentucky. The plaintiff, William Taylor, had entered into a contract with defendants John Walton and Thomas Hundly to purchase land from them for $1,000. After paying part of the sum due under the agreement but before completing payment on it, Taylor was informed that another individual had purchased the same property from Walton and Hundly at a higher price than what he had agreed to pay. He then brought suit against them for damages resulting from their breach of contract. In its decision, the court held that although there was no written evidence proving that such an agreement existed between all three parties involved in this dispute - namely Taylor as buyer; Walton and Hundly as sellers; and third-party purchaser - they were still bound by law to honor any verbal agreements made prior to or during negotiations regarding sale of said property. As such, they were found liable for breaching their contractual obligations towards Mr.Taylor who was awarded damages accordingly

In Taylor v. Walton and Hundly, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over a case involving citizens of different states. The majority opinion held that the state court did have jurisdiction in this case because it involved an issue of property law which fell within its purview. Justice Johnson dissented from this decision, arguing that the Constitution gave exclusive authority to federal courts when cases involve citizens of different states. He argued further that allowing state courts to exercise such power would lead to confusion and uncertainty as each state could interpret laws differently than other states or even Congress itself. Furthermore, he noted that if every dispute between two parties from different states were left up for interpretation by individual states then there would be no uniformity in how these disputes are handled across all jurisdictions; thus creating chaos instead of order among them.