This case was heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1832 and involved a dispute between Pierre Gassies, plaintiff in error, and Jean Gassies Ballon, defendant in error. The two were related through marriage; Pierre's wife had been previously married to Jean's father. At issue was whether or not certain lands that had belonged to Jean's father should pass on to him upon his death or if they should be inherited by Pierre as part of his wife’s dowry. In its decision, the court held that since the land at question had been acquired before the marriage of Pierre and his wife it did not form part of her dowry and thus could not be passed onto him after her death. As such, title for these lands remained with Jean who would inherit them from his deceased father according to French law which governed this matter due to both parties being citizens of France at the time when their fathers entered into an agreement regarding said property rights.

In this case, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a French land grant from 1803 could be enforced in Louisiana. The majority opinion held that it could not because of the terms of the Louisiana Purchase Treaty and other laws passed by Congress since then. However, Justice Story dissented on behalf of himself and three other justices. He argued that although Congress had indeed passed laws limiting foreign claims since 1803, those laws did not apply retroactively to pre-existing grants like Pierre Gassies'. Furthermore, he noted that even if they did apply retroactively, they would only limit their enforcement rather than completely invalidate them. As such, he concluded that Pierre Gassies' claim should have been recognized as valid under existing law and his suit against Jean Ballon should have been allowed to proceed in court.