This Supreme Court case involved a dispute between the lessee of William Pollard's heirs and Gaius Kibbe. The plaintiffs in error, the lessees, argued that they had been wrongfully evicted from their leased property by Kibbe who was acting as an agent for the owner. They claimed that he had no legal authority to do so and sought damages for trespass. In response, Kibbe argued that his actions were justified because he believed there was a breach of contract on behalf of the tenants which allowed him to evict them without notice or warning. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Kibbe ruling that since there was evidence suggesting a breach of contract on behalf of the tenants it gave him reasonable cause to believe they could be lawfully removed from their leaseholds without prior notification or warning.

In this case, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a deed of land in Rhode Island that had been executed by William Pollard's heirs and Gaius Kibbe was valid. The majority opinion held that the deed was not valid because it did not meet certain legal requirements for such deeds. However, Justice McLean dissented from this decision. He argued that while there were some technical errors with the deed, they should be overlooked since both parties intended to convey title to the property and had acted in good faith when executing it. Furthermore, he noted that if these technicalities were strictly enforced then many other similar transactions would also be invalidated which could lead to great injustice being done against innocent parties who relied on them as legally binding agreements. Therefore, Justice McLean concluded that despite its imperfections, the deed should still be considered valid due to its substantial compliance with all relevant laws and regulations governing such transfers of property rights at common law.