John McGavock brought a case against Peter W. Woodlie to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1857. The dispute was over an alleged breach of contract between them, and McGavock sought damages for his losses as a result of this breach. In order to prove that he had been wronged by Woodlie, McGavock argued that there was an implied agreement between them which should be enforced by law. However, the court found no evidence to support this claim and ruled in favor of Woodlie on all counts. This decision established precedent for future cases involving similar disputes; it held that if one party claims they have suffered damages due to another's actions or failure to act, then they must provide proof beyond reasonable doubt before any legal action can be taken against them.

In the case of John McGavock v. Peter W. Woodlie, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed given by McGavock to Woodlie was valid and binding under Tennessee law. The majority opinion held that it was not, as there had been no consideration paid for it and thus did not meet the requirements of a contract in Tennessee at that time. However, Justice Nelson dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that although no money or other valuable consideration had been exchanged between the parties when they entered into their agreement, an implied promise existed between them which should be considered sufficient; secondly he contended that even if such an implied promise could not be established then equity should still prevail due to both parties having acted in good faith when entering into their agreement with each other. In conclusion therefore Justice Nelson believed that despite there being no monetary exchange involved in this transaction it should nonetheless remain legally binding upon both parties as justice demanded it so do so