Wright v. Roseberry is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1887. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of a tract of land in the state of Arkansas. The plaintiff, Wright, had entered into a contract with the defendant, Roseberry, to purchase the land. Roseberry had agreed to sell the land for a certain sum of money, but then refused to complete the sale. Wright then brought suit against Roseberry, claiming that Roseberry had breached the contract and was liable for damages. The Supreme Court held that Roseberry was liable for damages, as he had breached the contract by refusing to complete the sale. The Court also held that the damages should be calculated based on the difference between the contract price and the market value of the land at the time of the breach. This decision established the principle that a party who breaches a contract is liable for damages based on the difference between the contract price and the market value of the property at the time of the breach.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Wright v. Roseberry, arguing that the majority's decision was incorrect and should be reversed. He argued that under California law, a married woman had no right to convey her separate property without her husband's consent or approval from a court of equity. The plaintiff had purchased land from Mrs. Roseberry with full knowledge of her marital status and thus knew she could not legally transfer it without such permission; however, he still chose to purchase it anyway as an investment opportunity despite this risk. Justice Field concluded that since the plaintiff was aware of these facts at the time of purchase, he should have been held accountable for his actions rather than allowing him to recover damages against Mrs. Roseberry for breach of contract due to lack of authority on her part when selling him the land in question.