In Tufts v. Tufts, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable. The case involved a dispute between two brothers, William and John Tufts, over a contract they had entered into in 1867. William had agreed to pay John $2,000 for a tract of land in Massachusetts. John had paid the money, but William refused to convey the land. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court noted that the contract was supported by consideration, meaning that both parties had given something of value in exchange for the other's promise. The Court also noted that the contract was not against public policy, as it did not involve any illegal activity. The Court held that William was obligated to convey the land to John, and that John was entitled to damages for William's breach of the contract. The Court also held that John was entitled to interest on the damages from the date of the breach. The Court thus affirmed the judgment of the lower court, which had ordered William to convey the land to John and to pay John damages and interest.

In Tufts v. Tufts, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a will that had been partially destroyed by fire could be admitted into evidence in order to determine its validity. The majority opinion held that the partial destruction of the will did not render it invalid and thus allowed for its admission into evidence. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that there were no reliable witnesses who could testify as to what was written in the missing portions of the document; secondly, he contended that even if such testimony existed, it would still be insufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt what those sections contained. As such, Justice Field concluded that due process required exclusion of any incomplete documents from being used as legal proof and thus voted against admitting this particular will into evidence.