The Mary Eveline was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1872. The case involved a dispute between the owners of the Mary Eveline, a vessel, and the owners of the cargo it was carrying. The owners of the Mary Eveline had contracted with the owners of the cargo to transport it from New York to Liverpool. However, the vessel was damaged during the voyage and the cargo was lost. The owners of the cargo sued the owners of the Mary Eveline for damages. The Supreme Court held that the owners of the Mary Eveline were liable for the damages caused by the vessel's negligence. The Court found that the owners of the Mary Eveline had breached their duty of care to the owners of the cargo by failing to properly maintain the vessel and by failing to take reasonable steps to protect the cargo. The Court also held that the owners of the Mary Eveline were liable for the damages caused by the vessel's negligence even though the owners of the cargo had not been negligent in any way. The Court's decision in The Mary Eveline established the principle that vessel owners are liable for damages caused by their negligence, even if the owners of the cargo are not negligent. This principle has been applied in numerous cases since then and is still in effect today.

In The Mary Eveline, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a vessel that had been sold to satisfy an admiralty decree could be resold by the purchaser. In a 5-4 decision, Justice Miller wrote for the majority and held that such sales were valid under maritime law. However, in his dissenting opinion, Justice Field argued that allowing such sales would create uncertainty and instability in commercial transactions involving vessels since purchasers of vessels at auction would not have any assurance as to who owned them or what liens they might carry. He further argued that this lack of certainty could lead to disputes between buyers and sellers over title which should be avoided if possible. Ultimately he concluded that while it may be necessary for courts to order resales of vessels when needed due to unforeseen circumstances like fraud or mistake on behalf of one party involved in the original sale process, it should not become standard practice as doing so would undermine confidence in commercial transactions involving ships.