In George King's Heirs, Raphael Semmes and Others v. Josiah Thompson and Elizabeth his Wife, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a deed of conveyance from George King to Josiah Thompson in 1802 was valid or voidable due to fraud. The appellants argued that the deed should be declared invalid because it had been procured by fraudulent misrepresentations made by Thompson regarding his title to certain lands conveyed under the deed. The court found that there were sufficient facts presented which could support a finding of fraud on behalf of Thompson; however, they held that such an issue must be determined at trial before any judgment can be rendered as to its validity or invalidity. Therefore, the case was remanded back for further proceedings in order for this determination to take place.

In George King's Heirs, Raphael Semmes and Others v. Josiah Thompson and Elizabeth his Wife, the dissenting opinion was that the court should not have granted a writ of error to reverse the judgment of the circuit court in favor of appellees. The dissent argued that there was no evidence presented by appellants to show any errors or irregularities in proceedings before the circuit court; therefore, it would be improper for this Court to grant a writ of error on such grounds. Furthermore, they argued that even if there were some errors made at trial level which could be corrected by granting a writ of error from this Court, those errors did not affect substantial rights as required under Rule 37 (now Rule 44) for granting such relief. Therefore, according to their argumentation, it is inappropriate for this Court to grant a writ of error when none has been requested nor shown sufficient cause exists for doing so.