The President, Directors and Company of the Bank of Alexandria brought a case against Thomas Swann in order to recover an unpaid debt. The bank argued that it had loaned money to Swann with interest, but he failed to pay back the full amount due. In response, Swann claimed that the contract was void because it violated Virginia's usury laws which prohibited lenders from charging more than 6% interest on loans. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Swann and ruled that since Virginia law prohibited any agreement for higher rates of interest, then such contracts were unenforceable and could not be used as evidence in court proceedings. This decision established a precedent whereby state usury laws would take precedence over private agreements between parties when determining whether or not a contract is valid under federal law.

In the case of The President, Directors and Company of the Bank of Alexandria v. Thomas Swann, a dissenting opinion was issued by Justice McLean. He argued that while it is true that banks are entitled to recover debts from their customers in accordance with contracts made between them, this does not mean they can do so without limitation or regard for other laws. In particular, he noted that Virginia had passed a law which prohibited any bank from recovering more than 6% interest on loans; thus even if an agreement between the parties allowed for higher rates of interest to be charged, such agreements were void under state law and could not be enforced by courts. Furthermore, Justice McLean argued that since no contract existed in this case due to its violation of state law then there was no basis upon which the court could grant relief to either party involved in this dispute.