Wood v. Steele was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1867. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a steamboat. The plaintiff, Wood, had entered into a contract with the defendant, Steele, to purchase a steamboat for $2,000. Wood paid the full amount of the purchase price, but Steele refused to deliver the steamboat. Wood then sued Steele for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that Steele was liable for breach of contract. The Court found that the contract between the parties was valid and enforceable, and that Steele had breached the contract by failing to deliver the steamboat. The Court also held that Wood was entitled to damages for the breach of contract, and that the damages should be equal to the amount of the purchase price. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that Steele was liable for breach of contract and that Wood was entitled to damages for the breach. The Court ordered Steele to pay Wood the full amount of the purchase price, plus interest.

In the case of Wood v. Steele, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority's decision was contrary to established precedent and would have far-reaching implications for contract law. He noted that prior cases had held that when an agreement is made between two parties, it must be performed according to its terms unless there are circumstances beyond their control or some other legal excuse for nonperformance. In this case, however, the majority found that one party could unilaterally terminate a contract without any justification or cause whatsoever. This ruling effectively allowed one party to avoid contractual obligations with impunity and undermined existing principles of good faith and fair dealing in contracts. As such, Justice Field concluded his dissent by arguing against allowing such unilateral termination as it would lead to chaos in commercial transactions throughout the country