In Day v. Gallup, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to determine whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by a citizen of another state against citizens of that same other state. The plaintiff in this case, Day, was from New York and sued two defendants who were also from New York for damages resulting from their alleged negligence while operating a steamboat on Lake Champlain. The defendants argued that since they were both citizens of New York, the suit should be heard in a court within that state rather than one located outside it. The Supreme Court disagreed with this argument and held that when parties are citizens of different states then those cases can be tried in any federal or circuit court regardless if all parties are residents or not. This decision established precedent which has been used ever since to ensure uniformity among courts across multiple jurisdictions as well as protect individuals' rights to access justice no matter where they live or what their citizenship status is.

In the case of Day v. Gallup, Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the decision of the lower court should be affirmed. He believed that Congress had not intended to grant exclusive jurisdiction over Indian tribes and their lands to federal courts when it passed legislation granting such authority. Furthermore, he argued that state courts were competent to decide cases involving Indians as long as they did not conflict with any laws or treaties made by Congress concerning them. Additionally, Justice Field noted that there was no evidence presented at trial indicating whether or not this particular land belonged exclusively to an Indian tribe and thus could only be decided upon by a federal court; therefore, he concluded that it would have been improper for the Supreme Court to reverse the judgment of the lower court without more information on this issue.