In Bodley and Others v. Taylor, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case concerning an action for trespass on land in Virginia. The plaintiffs alleged that they had been wrongfully dispossessed from their property by defendant William Taylor, who claimed to have purchased it from another party. The court found that while there was evidence of some kind of agreement between Taylor and the other party, there was no proof that this agreement constituted a valid title transfer or sale sufficient to give him legal possession over the land in question. As such, they held that he did not have any right to take possession without first obtaining permission from either the original owners or those with superior rights thereto; thus his actions were deemed unlawful trespasses against them and damages were awarded accordingly.

In Bodley and Others v. Taylor, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed of trust executed by William Taylor in 1790 should be enforced against his heirs. The majority opinion held that it should not, as there had been no consideration given for the deed and thus it was voidable at any time before execution. However, Chief Justice Marshall dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that if a contract is made with an intent to benefit third parties then those parties are entitled to enforce its terms; secondly, he noted that although there had been no consideration given for the deed of trust itself, William Taylor's estate had received some benefits from its execution which could constitute sufficient consideration under common law principles. As such, Chief Justice Marshall concluded that the deed of trust should be enforced against William Taylor's heirs despite their lack of involvement in executing it or receiving any direct benefit from it.