James M. Cooper brought a case against Enoch C. Roberts to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1855, arguing that he was entitled to compensation for services rendered as an attorney and counselor at law on behalf of Roberts. The court found that there had been no express contract between them, but rather a verbal agreement which could not be enforced due to lack of consideration or mutuality of obligation. Furthermore, it held that even if such an agreement did exist, it would still fail because attorneys are prohibited from recovering fees unless they have obtained permission from their clients beforehand. As such, Cooper's claim was denied and his petition dismissed without prejudice by the court.

In the case of James M. Cooper v. Enoch C. Roberts, Justice Grier delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the plaintiff had not been given due process and was denied his right to a jury trial as guaranteed by the Constitution of Pennsylvania. He noted that while it is true that an action for damages may be brought before a justice of peace, this does not mean such proceedings should take place without any formality or legal protection for either party involved in the dispute. Furthermore, he argued that since there was no evidence presented at trial to support defendant's claim against plaintiff, it would have been more appropriate if both parties were allowed to present their respective cases before a jury who could then decide on what facts are relevant and how much damages should be awarded accordingly. In conclusion, Justice Grier concluded that denying plaintiff his right to due process violated both state law and federal constitutional guarantees; thus making defendant’s judgment invalid under these circumstances