Brown v. Grant & Others was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1886. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, William Brown, and the defendants, Grant & Others, over the ownership of a piece of land in the state of Mississippi. Brown claimed that he had purchased the land from the defendants in 1871, but the defendants argued that the sale was invalid because it had not been properly recorded. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Brown, finding that the sale was valid and that he was the rightful owner of the land. The Court held that the recording of the deed was not necessary to make the sale valid, and that the defendants had no right to reclaim the land. The Court also held that the statute of limitations had expired, meaning that the defendants could not challenge the sale after the passage of fifteen years. This ruling established that a deed does not need to be recorded in order to be valid, and that the statute of limitations applies to all real estate transactions.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Brown v. Grant & Others, arguing that the majority's decision was an incorrect interpretation of the law and would lead to a dangerous precedent. He argued that under California state law, a married woman could not convey her real estate without her husband's consent; thus, when Mrs. Brown conveyed her property to Mr. Grant without his knowledge or approval, it was voidable at his option and did not pass title to him as she had intended. Furthermore, Justice Field argued that even if Mrs Grant had obtained her husband's permission before conveying the land - which he believed she did - this still would have been insufficient for passing title since such permission must be given in writing according to California state law at the time of this case (1886). Therefore, Justice Field concluded that Mr. Brown should retain ownership over his wife’s property and urged reversal of judgment by declaring it invalid on all grounds presented in court proceedings