The Lessee of Edward Livingston and Others v. John Moore and Others was a Supreme Court case that revolved around the interpretation of an 1820 Louisiana law which granted certain rights to lessees in regards to their property. The plaintiffs, who were the lessees, argued that they had acquired title to the land by virtue of this law; however, defendants contended that it only gave them possessory rights over the land. In its ruling, the court sided with defendants and held that while under Louisiana's Civil Code a lease could be used as evidence for ownership claims if there is no other proof available, such was not applicable here since there were other documents proving ownership. Furthermore, it found that even though some parts of Louisiana's Civil Code may have been intended to grant more extensive rights than those provided by common law leases in England or America at large - including granting full title after seven years - these provisions did not apply retroactively so as to affect existing contracts made prior thereto.

In the case of The Lessee of Edward Livingston and Others v. John Moore and Others, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the Court should not have granted relief to Livingston's lessees because they had failed to show any legal right or title to the property at issue. He reasoned that if there was no valid lease agreement between them, then their claim could not be sustained under existing law. Furthermore, even if such an agreement did exist, it would still need to be proven by competent evidence before a court could grant relief. In conclusion, Chief Justice Marshall believed that granting relief without proof of legal rights or titles was contrary to established principles of equity and justice and thus should not have been done in this case.