In George S. Gaines, et al v. Isaac W. Nicholson, et al., the appellants were challenging a decision by the Circuit Court of Virginia which had granted an injunction to prevent them from taking possession of certain lands in dispute between them and the respondents. The appellants argued that they held title to these lands through inheritance and purchase while the respondents claimed ownership based on their own purchases from other parties who also had titles to those same lands. After reviewing both sides' arguments, including evidence presented at trial, the Supreme Court determined that there was insufficient proof for either party's claim of title and thus reversed the lower court's ruling granting an injunction against possession by any party until further proceedings could be conducted in order to determine rightful ownership of said property.

In the case of George S. Gaines, Francis S. Lyon and his wife Sarah Lyon, James M. Davenport and his wife Alethan Davenport, Goodman G. Griffin and his wife Willey Ann Griffin, George Frederick Glover, Ann Gaines Glover, Louisa Davenport Glover Mary Thompson and Mary A. Glover v Isaac W Nicholson Powhatan B Thermond Lewis B Barnes John T Moseley S M Goode & John Hilman the dissenting opinion was that a contract between two parties should be upheld even if it is not in writing as long as there is evidence to prove its existence such as witnesses or other forms of proof that can demonstrate an agreement had been made between them both before any dispute arose over ownership rights or possession of property involved in the contract . The dissent argued that since this particular case did have sufficient evidence to support a verbal agreement then it should be honored by upholding the original terms agreed upon by both parties instead of being overruled due to lack of written documentation which could lead to unjust outcomes for either side depending on who has more resources available at their disposal when seeking legal recourse against one another