Wilson v. Salamanca is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1878. The case involved a dispute between two parties over the ownership of a piece of land in New York. The plaintiff, Wilson, claimed that he had purchased the land from the defendant, Salamanca, and that he had paid for it in full. Salamanca, however, argued that the sale was invalid because he had not received full payment for the land. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Wilson, ruling that the sale was valid and that Wilson had paid for the land in full. The Court reasoned that Salamanca had accepted Wilson's payment and had not taken any action to dispute the sale. Furthermore, the Court noted that Salamanca had not taken any steps to reclaim the land or to seek compensation for the unpaid portion of the purchase price. The Court's decision in Wilson v. Salamanca established that a sale is valid if the seller has accepted payment and has not taken any action to dispute the sale. This ruling has been cited in numerous subsequent cases and has become an important precedent in contract law.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Wilson v. Salamanca, a case concerning whether or not an Indian tribe had the right to sue for damages caused by trespass on their land. Justice Field argued that although Congress had passed laws granting Indians certain rights and privileges, those laws did not grant them the right to bring suit against non-Indians for trespassing on their lands. He noted that such suits were only allowed when authorized by treaty or statute, neither of which was present in this case. Furthermore, he argued that allowing tribes to bring suit would be contrary to public policy because it could lead to numerous lawsuits from other tribes over similar issues and create confusion among courts as they tried to determine who should have jurisdiction over these cases. Finally, Justice Field concluded his dissent with a warning about how allowing tribal suits could potentially open up a Pandora's box of litigation between Native Americans and non-Indians alike without any clear guidance from Congress as far as what remedies should be available in such disputes.