Buddicum v. Kirk was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court in 1806. The dispute arose when James Buddicum, an inhabitant of Kentucky, sued John Kirk for trespass and damages to his property. Buddicum alleged that he had been wrongfully dispossessed from land which he claimed as his own by virtue of a grant from the state of Virginia prior to Kentucky's admission into the Union. The court held that while Virginia did have authority to make such grants within its boundaries at the time, it could not extend beyond them after Kentucky became part of the Union and thus any claims made under those grants were invalidated upon entry into union with other states. Furthermore, since no valid title existed in favor of either party at law or equity, neither could recover damages against each other on account thereof; therefore judgment was rendered for defendant on all counts

In Buddicum v. Kirk, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over a case that involved citizens of different states and which arose out of an agreement made in one state but performed in another. The majority opinion held that the lower court did not have jurisdiction because it lacked authority under the Constitution to hear cases between citizens of two different states. Justice Chase dissented from this decision, arguing that Congress had granted such power to state courts through its Judiciary Act of 1789 and therefore they should be allowed to exercise their authority in this case as well. He argued further that if Congress could grant such powers then so too could individual states when acting within their own borders, thus allowing for diversity jurisdiction even without Congressional approval.