George W. Phillips brought a case against John S. Preston to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1850, claiming that he was wrongfully evicted from his property by Preston and had suffered damages as a result. The court ruled in favor of Phillips, finding that under South Carolina law at the time, an eviction without due process or legal authority constituted trespass and could be grounds for damages. Furthermore, they held that even if there were some technical defect with respect to how Phillips obtained title to his land - which was not established during trial - it did not invalidate his right to possession or relief from wrongful eviction since he had been occupying it for many years prior without dispute. This decision set an important precedent regarding rights of occupancy and protection from unlawful dispossession regardless of any potential defects in title ownership.

In the case of George W. Phillips v. John S. Preston, Justice McLean delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should have granted relief to Phillips on his claim for damages against Preston for breach of contract and conversion of property. He reasoned that although there was no written agreement between the parties, it was clear from their course of dealing with each other that an implied contract existed between them and thus Preston had breached this contract by wrongfully taking possession of certain goods belonging to Phillips without paying him what they were worth at market value as agreed upon when they entered into their arrangement. Furthermore, Justice McLean noted that even if there had been no express or implied agreement between the two men, then under common law principles governing trover actions (which allow one party to recover damages from another who has wrongfully taken possession of their property) Phillips would still be entitled to compensation since he could prove ownership over these goods through evidence presented during trial proceedings such as witnesses’ testimony and documentary records showing payment made by him prior to being dispossessed by Preston's wrongful act. Therefore, Justice McLean concluded that justice demanded a judgment in favor of Philips on both counts – breach of contract and conversion – so as not only give effect to his legal rights but also provide recompense for any losses suffered due thereto