Ex parte Ferry Company was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state court had the authority to issue an injunction against a ferry company operating in the state. The ferry company had been operating in the state for several years without a license, and the state court had issued an injunction against the company, ordering it to cease operations. The ferry company appealed the injunction to the Supreme Court, arguing that the state court did not have the authority to issue such an injunction. The Supreme Court held that the state court did have the authority to issue the injunction. The Court reasoned that the state had a legitimate interest in regulating the operation of ferries within its borders, and that the injunction was a reasonable means of enforcing that interest. The Court also noted that the ferry company had been operating without a license for several years, and that the state had a right to protect its citizens from potential harm caused by the ferry company's operations. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the state court had the authority to issue the injunction against the ferry company, and that the injunction was a reasonable means of enforcing the state's interest in regulating the operation of ferries within its borders.

In Ex Parte Ferry Company, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by a non-resident against a corporation that operated in multiple states. The majority opinion held that the state court did not have jurisdiction because it lacked sufficient contacts with either party and thus could not exercise personal jurisdiction over them. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that while there may be some doubt as to whether or not the state court had general jurisdiction over both parties, it certainly had specific jurisdiction due to its connection with one of them - namely, the defendant's business operations within its borders. He argued further that since corporations are creatures of law and must obey their laws wherever they operate, then any suit arising out of those activities should be heard in whatever courts have been established for such purposes by those laws.