Matthews v. Zane's Lesse was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1809. The dispute arose when John Matthews, an Englishman who had been living in Maryland since 1790, sued William Zane for possession of land that he claimed to have leased from him in 1797. In his complaint, Matthews alleged that he had paid all rent due on the property and made improvements to it but was wrongfully dispossessed of it by Zane without any legal cause or justification. The court found for Matthews and held that as long as he continued paying rent on the property according to their agreement, then no one else could lawfully take possession of it away from him without his consent or some other lawful authority. This decision established important precedent regarding leases and landlord-tenant law which still stands today; namely, that landlords cannot simply evict tenants at will if they are fulfilling their obligations under a lease agreement unless there is some other legal basis for doing so such as nonpayment of rent or breach of contract terms.

In Matthews v. Zane's Lessee, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a tenant in possession of land could be ejected by another party who had purchased the right to do so from an assignee of the original landlord. The majority opinion held that such ejectment was permissible under Maryland law and thus affirmed the lower court’s decision. However, Justice Story dissented on two grounds: first, he argued that there were no precedents for allowing this type of ejectment; second, he contended that it would be unjust to allow someone other than a rightful owner or landlord to evict tenants from their homes without due process protections. He concluded his dissent by noting that “the rights of property are sacredly guarded against all invasions whatsoever” and should not be subject to arbitrary interference by third parties with no legal claim over them.