John Hawkins and William May brought a case to the Supreme Court against Joshua Barney's Lessee. The plaintiffs argued that they had purchased land from the state of Maryland in 1815, but were unable to obtain legal title due to an earlier patent granted by Virginia for the same property. They sought compensation for their losses as well as damages caused by trespassers on their land. The defendant argued that he was entitled to possession of the disputed lands under his valid patent from Virginia, which predated any claim made by Maryland or its citizens. After considering both sides' arguments, the court ruled in favor of Barney's Lessee; it held that since his patent was issued first, he had superior rights over those claiming ownership through subsequent grants from other states or entities. Furthermore, it found no evidence indicating fraud or bad faith on behalf of either party in this dispute and thus denied all claims made by Hawkins and May for damages resulting from trespassers on their land.

In the case of John Hawkins and William May, Plaintiffs in Error vs. Joshua Barney's Lessee, Defendant in Error, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion. He argued that the Court should not have dismissed the writ of error as it was issued by an appellate court with jurisdiction over this matter. The original judgment had been rendered against Hawkins and May for trespass on land owned by Barney’s lessee; however, they claimed to be entitled to possession under a prior grant from Maryland which predated Barney’s leasehold title. Marshall believed that if their claim were true then there would be no trespass committed and thus no cause of action for damages or ejectment could arise against them since their right to possession would take precedence over any other claimant. Therefore he concluded that the Circuit Court did not have jurisdiction over this dispute because it involved questions concerning title rather than mere matters of fact or law related to trespassing alone.