This case was heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1860. Plaintiff Braddock Jones brought a suit against James G. Soulard for damages caused to his property due to negligence on behalf of Soulard's employees while they were working on an adjacent lot owned by Soulard. The court found that although it was true that the damage occurred as a result of negligent actions, there was no evidence presented which showed that those actions were taken with malicious intent or recklessness and thus could not be held liable for any damages incurred. The court ultimately ruled in favor of defendant James G. Soulard, finding him not responsible for any losses suffered by plaintiff Braddock Jones as a result of the incident in question.

In Braddock Jones v. James G. Soulard, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by a citizen of one state against another in which the defendant resided in a different state and owned property there. The majority opinion held that it did not have such jurisdiction, as it would be unconstitutional for states to exercise authority beyond their own borders without consent from Congress or other states involved. However, Justice Nelson dissented on this point, arguing that since the Constitution does not explicitly prohibit such actions between citizens of different states and since they are allowed under common law principles of comity among nations, then these types of suits should be allowed in order for justice to prevail between parties who may otherwise have no recourse due to jurisdictional issues. He further argued that if Congress had intended otherwise they could easily pass legislation prohibiting them but has chosen not to do so thus far.