The Adriatic was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1883. The case involved a dispute between the owners of the Adriatic, a steamship, and the owners of the cargo it was carrying. The cargo owners had sued the Adriatic's owners for damages caused by the ship's negligence. The Adriatic's owners argued that they were not liable for the damages because the ship had been chartered by the United States government and was being used for military purposes. The Supreme Court held that the Adriatic's owners were liable for the damages. The Court reasoned that the Adriatic was a private vessel and was not exempt from liability for its negligence. The Court noted that the government had not assumed responsibility for the vessel's operation and that the vessel was not being used for any public purpose. The Court also noted that the government had not provided any indemnity or insurance for the vessel. The Court concluded that the Adriatic's owners were liable for the damages caused by their negligence. The Court held that the owners had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of the vessel and that they had failed to do so. The Court also held that the owners were liable for the damages caused by their negligence even though the vessel was being used for military purposes.

In The Adriatic, the Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether a shipowner could recover damages from an insurance company for losses incurred due to a collision. Justice Field wrote the dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had misconstrued and misinterpreted certain provisions of maritime law. He asserted that under existing laws, it was clear that the owner of a vessel is entitled to receive compensation when their property has been damaged or destroyed as long as they have not contributed to its destruction through negligence or other fault on their part. Furthermore, Field noted that there were no exceptions in this case where contributory negligence would bar recovery; thus, he concluded that since there was no evidence of any wrongdoing by either party involved in this incident, both should be held liable for damages caused by their respective vessels during the collision. In conclusion, Justice Field disagreed with his colleagues' ruling and believed instead that both parties should bear responsibility for any damage resulting from their actions at sea.