Hiram Clearwater brought a case against Solomon Meredith, Pleasant Johnson, and Thomas Tyner in the Supreme Court. He argued that he had been wrongfully evicted from his land by the defendants. The court found that while there was evidence of wrongful eviction, it did not meet the standard for ejectment as defined by state law. Therefore, they ruled in favor of the defendants and denied Hiram's claim to regain possession of his property. This decision established an important precedent regarding what constitutes legal grounds for ejectment under state laws. It also highlighted how courts must consider both facts and applicable statutes when making decisions about cases involving real estate disputes between private parties.

In the case of Hiram Clearwater v. Solomon Meredith, Pleasant Johnson, and Thomas Tyner, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced if it had not been signed by both parties. The majority opinion held that such contracts were valid and enforceable even without signatures from both sides. However, Justice Grier dissented from this ruling on the grounds that he believed there should be some form of written evidence in order for a contract to be legally binding. He argued that verbal agreements alone are insufficient proof of an agreement's existence or terms; therefore, he concluded that any contract must have at least one signature in order to be considered valid and enforceable under law.