Charles Ballance brought a case to the Supreme Court against Adolph Papin, Henry Papin, and Mary Atchison. He claimed that he had been wrongfully evicted from his home by the defendants and was seeking damages for their actions. The court found in favor of Ballance, ruling that he had indeed been wrongfully evicted from his home without due process or legal justification. They ordered the defendants to pay him $1,000 in compensation for their wrongful eviction as well as costs associated with bringing suit against them. This decision set an important precedent regarding tenant rights and established protections for tenants who are unlawfully removed from their homes without proper cause or notice.

In the case of Charles Ballance v. Adolph Papin, Henry Papin, and Mary Atchison, Justice Curtis wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had incorrectly interpreted the law regarding contracts between minors and adults. He noted that while it was true that such contracts were voidable by either party at any time before reaching legal age or marriage (whichever came first), this did not mean they could be voided after those events occurred. In his view, once a minor reached adulthood or married, their contract with an adult should become binding just as if it had been made with another adult. Furthermore, he argued that even if there was some ambiguity in the language of the statute governing these types of agreements between minors and adults – which would have allowed for them to be voided after adulthood/marriage – then courts should interpret such laws so as to protect innocent third parties who relied on them being validly enforced.