Van Ness v. Forrest was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1814 that dealt with the issue of whether or not an individual could be held liable for damages caused to another person's property due to negligence. The plaintiff, Van Ness, had leased his land and buildings from Forrest who then allowed them to become dilapidated and unsafe. As a result of this neglect, one of Van Ness' tenants suffered injury when part of the building collapsed on him while he was working inside it. In its ruling, the court found that although there is no general duty imposed upon landlords regarding their tenant’s safety, they are responsible for any damage done as a result of their own negligence or carelessness which causes harm to others. Therefore, Forrest was found liable for damages caused by his negligent maintenance and upkeep of Van Ness' property resulting in injury sustained by one of his tenants.

In Van Ness v. Forrest, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed of trust executed by James Forrest in 1797 was valid and enforceable against his heirs after his death. The majority opinion held that it was not, as the deed had been made without consideration and thus lacked legal effect. However, Justice Story dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that there were sufficient facts present to infer consideration for the transfer; secondly, he contended that even if no consideration could be inferred from these facts alone, then equity should intervene to uphold the transaction since it would otherwise lead to an unjust result where one party is enriched at another's expense. Ultimately Justice Story concluded that "the court ought not lightly set aside a contract which has been solemnly entered into between parties".