Waters v. Barrill was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of a contract between two parties. The case involved a dispute between William Waters and John Barrill, who had entered into a contract in which Waters agreed to pay Barrill a certain sum of money for the use of a certain piece of land. Waters had paid the money, but Barrill refused to deliver the land. Waters then sued Barrill for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Waters was entitled to recover the money he had paid, plus interest, from Barrill. The Court reasoned that the contract between the two parties was valid and enforceable, and that Barrill had breached the contract by refusing to deliver the land. The Court also held that Waters was entitled to recover the money he had paid, plus interest, as damages for the breach of contract. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that Waters was entitled to recover the money he had paid, plus interest, from Barrill for breach of contract. The Court reasoned that the contract between the two parties was valid and enforceable, and that Barrill had breached the contract by refusing to deliver the land.

In Waters v. Barrill, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced if it had been made in violation of an existing state law. The majority opinion held that such contracts were not enforceable and should be declared void by the court. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that while it may have been illegal for the parties to enter into such a contract at the time they did so, there was no reason why they should not still be able to benefit from their agreement after its illegality had expired due to changes in state laws or other circumstances. He argued that allowing them to do so would encourage people who are otherwise willing and able to make binding agreements with each other without fear of legal repercussions down the line. Furthermore, he noted that denying them this right would only serve as an incentive for individuals or companies looking for loopholes around existing laws rather than abiding by them faithfully.