Henshaw et al. v. Bissell was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a patentee could sue for infringement of a patent in a state court. The patentee, Henshaw, had obtained a patent for a machine for making paper bags. Bissell had made and sold a similar machine without Henshaw's permission. Henshaw sued Bissell in a state court for infringement of his patent. The Supreme Court held that a patentee could sue for infringement of a patent in a state court. The Court reasoned that the patentee had a right to protect his invention from infringement, and that the state court was the proper forum for such a suit. The Court also noted that the patentee had a right to a jury trial in such a suit, and that the state court was the proper forum for such a trial. The Court also held that the patentee was entitled to damages for the infringement of his patent. The Court reasoned that the patentee had a right to be compensated for the infringement of his patent, and that the damages should be determined by a jury. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that a patentee could sue for infringement of a patent in a state court, and that the patentee was entitled to damages for the infringement of his patent.

In Henshaw et al. v. Bissell, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a probate court in another state. The majority opinion held that it did not have such jurisdiction and dismissed the case for lack of standing. However, Justice Field dissented on this point, arguing that the Constitution grants states exclusive authority over their own courts and allows them to exercise judicial power within their borders as they see fit; thus, he argued that it should be up to each individual state to decide if its courts can accept appeals from other states' probate courts or not. He further noted that there is no federal law prohibiting such action and concluded by stating his belief that allowing one state's court system access to another's would promote justice rather than impede it.