The John Griffin was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1875. The case involved a dispute between the owners of the steamship John Griffin and the owners of the schooner Mary E. Smith. The owners of the John Griffin claimed that the Mary E. Smith had negligently caused a collision between the two vessels, resulting in damages to the John Griffin. The owners of the Mary E. Smith argued that the John Griffin was at fault for the collision, and that they should not be held liable for the damages. The Supreme Court ultimately held that the owners of the Mary E. Smith were liable for the damages caused by the collision. The Court reasoned that the Mary E. Smith had failed to exercise due care in avoiding the collision, and that the John Griffin had acted in a reasonable manner in attempting to avoid the collision. The Court also held that the owners of the Mary E. Smith were liable for the damages even though the John Griffin had been negligent in some respects. This decision established the principle that a vessel that fails to exercise due care in avoiding a collision is liable for the damages caused by the collision, even if the other vessel was also negligent.

In the case of The John Griffin, Justice Field wrote a dissenting opinion. He argued that the majority's decision was wrong because it did not take into account all relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the vessel in question. Specifically, he noted that while there were some discrepancies between the original bill of sale and subsequent documents regarding ownership of The John Griffin, these discrepancies could be explained by other factors such as changes in business practices or errors made during transcription. Furthermore, he argued that even if one assumed that title had been transferred to another party at some point prior to litigation beginning, this would still not invalidate any claims against those who held possession of The John Griffin when suit was brought against them for damages caused by their negligence. Ultimately Justice Field concluded that since no evidence existed which conclusively demonstrated an actual transfer of title from one owner to another before suit began on behalf of those claiming damage due to negligence aboard The John Griffin, then they should be allowed to proceed with their claim without being barred by limitations imposed upon them based on assumptions about past transfers which could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt.