Jack T. Griffin and his wife brought a case against James Y. Reynolds in the Supreme Court of the United States, claiming that they had been wrongfully evicted from their home by Reynolds. The Griffins argued that they were entitled to remain on the land until their lease expired or until they received proper notice of eviction, neither of which occurred in this case. The court found for Reynolds, ruling that he was not obligated to provide any such notice before evicting them as tenants at will since there was no written agreement between him and the Griffins regarding how much time would be required for notification prior to eviction. Furthermore, it held that even if there had been an agreement requiring such notification, it could still have been terminated without cause under common law principles applicable at the time of this dispute. Ultimately, this decision established a precedent whereby landlords are not legally bound to give tenants advance warning before evicting them unless otherwise specified in writing beforehand

In the case of Jack T. Griffin and Wife v. James Y. Reynolds, Justice McLean delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the plaintiffs had not been given due process under the law as they were denied their right to be heard on appeal from an earlier decision by a lower court judge who had found against them. He further argued that this was contrary to both common law and equity principles, as well as being unconstitutional according to Article III Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that "the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction". As such, Justice McLean concluded that it was necessary for there to be some form of review or hearing before any final judgement could be made in order for justice to prevail and so he dissented from the majority opinion of his fellow justices on this matter.