In Duncan M'Arthur v. Wesley S. Porter's Lessee, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a lessee of land had the right to bring an action for trespass against another who entered and occupied part of that land without permission from either the lessor or lessee. The court held that while a tenant has no right to sue in his own name, he may maintain such an action if it is brought in the name of his landlord as plaintiff and himself as defendant-in-error. This decision established that tenants have standing to sue on behalf of their landlords when they are wrongfully deprived of possession by third parties, even though they do not possess legal title themselves.

In the case of Duncan M'Arthur v. Wesley S. Porter's Lessee, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a lessee had an obligation to pay rent for land that he leased from another party if it turned out that the lessor did not have legal title to the property in question. The majority opinion held that since there was no valid lease agreement between them, and thus no contract, then there could be no liability on either side for any payment of rent or damages due to breach of contract. However, Justice Story dissented from this decision and argued that even though there may not have been a valid lease agreement between them due to lack of title by the lessor, still justice should prevail as long as it is established beyond doubt that both parties acted in good faith when entering into their arrangement; therefore he believed they should be allowed some form of compensation for their respective losses incurred during this transaction. He concluded his dissent with a call for equity and fairness over strict adherence to technicalities in such cases where one party has suffered loss through no fault or negligence on their part but instead because they were misled by another who lacked proper authority over said property at issue