In Clarke v. Bazadone, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a state court could not exercise jurisdiction over an action brought by citizens of another state against a citizen of their own state in cases where there was no diversity between them. The case arose when two Marylanders, John Clarke and Joseph Bazadone, entered into an agreement for the sale and delivery of goods from Virginia to Maryland. When Clarke failed to pay for the goods as agreed upon, Bazadone sued him in a Maryland court. However, because both parties were citizens of Maryland at the time they entered into their contract and neither had any connection with Virginia or any other foreign jurisdiction outside their home state, it was held that under Article III Section 2 Clause 1 (the Diversity Clause) of the U.S Constitution which grants federal courts exclusive original jurisdiction over civil actions between citizens from different states; only federal courts had authority to hear such disputes involving non-diverse parties like this one - thus making it improper for a State court to take up such matters even if all involved are its own citizens.

In Clarke v. Bazadone, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by a citizen of another state against a defendant who resided in the same foreign state as the plaintiff. The majority opinion held that such actions were not within the scope of federal judicial power and thus could only be heard in state courts. Justice Samuel Chase dissented from this ruling, arguing that it would lead to unnecessary delays and costs for litigants seeking justice in cases involving citizens of different states. He argued that Congress should have been given authority to determine when such suits could be brought before federal courts, rather than leaving it up to individual states which may or may not grant access depending on their own laws and interests. Furthermore, he noted that if Congress did not act then there was no way for individuals living outside their home states to seek redress without having to travel long distances at great expense just so they can file suit in another court system entirely unfamiliar with them or their case.