James Adams brought a case against Philip Otterback to the Supreme Court in 1853. Adams argued that he had been wrongfully evicted from his property by Otterback, who claimed ownership of it. The court found that while Otterback did have legal title to the land, he had not obtained it through proper means and was therefore not entitled to possession of it. Furthermore, they ruled that since Adams had been living on the land for more than twenty years prior to its sale by its original owner, he was legally entitled to remain there until such time as another rightful claimant could be established or until a court order directed him otherwise. This ruling set an important precedent regarding adverse possession laws in America; if someone has lived on a piece of property for long enough without any interference from its true owner then they may be able to claim legal rights over it regardless of their lack of formal title documents.

In the case of James Adams v. Philip Otterback, Justice McLean delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the plaintiff should have been awarded damages for his losses due to an illegal trespass by the defendant. The majority had ruled that because there was no evidence of actual damage done to the property, and only potential damage, then no damages were owed. However, Justice McLean disagreed with this ruling and stated that it is not necessary for a party to prove actual injury or loss before they can be compensated; rather they need only show proof of an unlawful act having taken place on their property. He further argued that if such acts are allowed without consequence then people will feel free to commit them without fear of retribution or financial penalty from those whose rights have been violated. Therefore, he concluded that since there was clear evidence showing an illegal trespass had occurred on Mr Adams' land then he should be entitled to some form of compensation as recompense for his losses regardless if any physical harm could be proven or not.