In Conway et al. vs. Taylor's Executor, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over a case involving an executor appointed by another state’s court. The plaintiffs argued that since they were citizens of Virginia and their cause of action arose in Virginia, then only a Virginia court should have jurisdiction over it. The defendant argued that since he was appointed as executor by North Carolina courts, then North Carolina courts should have exclusive jurisdiction over the dispute. After considering both sides' arguments, the Supreme Court held that while states may exercise concurrent or joint jurisdiction when necessary for justice and convenience, this particular case did not require such an arrangement because there was no conflict between two separate jurisdictions; instead it involved one party from each state with no conflicting interests between them so neither could claim exclusive rights to adjudicate the matter in question. Therefore, only one forum - either North Carolina or Virginia - could properly hear this dispute and thus it must be decided according to which ever forum first acquired proper legal authority over it through its own laws and proceedings

In Conway et al. vs. Taylor's Executor, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a deed of trust executed by William Taylor in 1835 to secure payment of a debt was valid and enforceable against his estate after he died in 1854 without having fully paid off the debt. The majority opinion held that it was not, as Virginia law did not recognize such deeds at the time they were created and thus could not be enforced against an estate after death. However, Justice Grier dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, that even though Virginia law had changed since 1835 so as to no longer recognize these types of deeds for new transactions, existing ones should still remain valid; secondly, that if there were any doubts about its validity under state law then federal courts should have jurisdiction over it due to its being part of interstate commerce between states (Virginia and Maryland). In conclusion Justice Grier argued that because William Taylor had acted in good faith when executing the deed back in 1835 it should be considered legally binding upon his estate despite changes in state laws since then.