John Doe, on the demise of Lot Clark, David Clarkson, Joseph D. Beers, Andrew Talcott, Brantz Mayer and Harriet Hackley brought a case against Joseph Addison Braden to the Supreme Court. The plaintiffs argued that they were entitled to certain lands in Ohio under an act of Congress from 1820 which granted them land for military service during the Revolutionary War. However, Braden claimed he had purchased these same lands from another party before their claim was made and thus should be allowed to keep them as his own property. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Braden due to his prior purchase being valid according to state law at the time and therefore held precedence over any claims by John Doe's group based on federal legislation passed 33 years earlier.

In this case, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed of trust executed by Joseph Addison Braden in 1845 was valid. The plaintiffs argued that the deed had been improperly executed and therefore invalid. However, the majority opinion held that because there were no objections raised at the time of execution or during subsequent years, it should be considered valid. Justice Grier dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that since there had been no consideration given for the deed when it was originally made, it could not be enforced; secondly, he stated that even if consideration had been given at some point after its execution (which is unclear), such an action would have violated public policy as well as principles of equity and good conscience. He concluded his dissent by stating "I cannot concur in any judgment which sanctions so manifest a fraud upon creditors".