In the case of William W. Teal v Mary C. Felton, by her next friend Charles T. Hicks, Teal was suing for damages after a horse he had sold to Felton died shortly after being purchased from him due to an alleged defect in its leg that he failed to disclose before sale. The Supreme Court held that although there may have been some negligence on the part of Teal in not disclosing this information prior to sale, it did not rise up to the level necessary for liability as his failure was only slight and any damage caused by it would be considered too remote or speculative under existing law at the time. Thus, they ruled against Teal and found no cause for damages owed by him towards Felton's claim

In the dissenting opinion of William W. Teal v Mary C. Felton, Justice McLean argued that the plaintiff had not proven his case and should not be awarded damages for a breach of contract. He stated that there was no evidence to support the claim that an agreement between Teal and Felton existed or had been breached by either party, as neither could prove they were aware of any such arrangement prior to their dispute in court. Furthermore, he noted that even if it could be established that an agreement did exist between them, it would have been void due to its illegality under existing state law at the time. In conclusion, Justice McLean concluded that since there was insufficient proof presented by either side regarding a valid contract or breach thereof on behalf of either party involved in this case, judgment should not be granted in favor of Teal against Felton's next friend Charles T Hicks