Henry Miller's Heirs and Devisees, Complainants and Appellants v. Jacob and Isaac M'Intyre, Appellees was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1832. The dispute centered on whether or not Henry Miller had been legally emancipated from slavery prior to his death in 1799. At issue were two deeds of emancipation that had been executed by Miller's former master, John Hite; one deed dated 1794 which granted freedom to all slaves owned by Hite at the time of execution, including Henry Miller; another deed dated 1797 which specifically named only certain individuals as being freed from bondage. The court ultimately ruled that since no evidence existed demonstrating that either deed was ever delivered to any party involved (including Henry Miller), neither document could be considered valid under Virginia law at the time nor did they constitute legal proof of emancipation for Mr.Miller before his death in 1799 . As such, it was determined that he remained enslaved until his passing and therefore all property acquired during this period belonged solely to his former masters rather than any heirs or devisees upon his demise..

In Henry Miller's Heirs and Devisees, Complainants and Appellants v. Jacob and Isaac M'Intyre, Appellees, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed of trust executed by Henry Miller in 1819 was valid. The majority opinion held that it was not valid because it did not comply with the requirements of the Statute of Frauds. However, Justice Story dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that there had been sufficient evidence presented to prove that an oral agreement existed between Miller and his grantees; secondly he argued that even if such an agreement could not be proven then equity should intervene as justice demanded it due to the fact that both parties had acted upon their understanding for over ten years without any dispute or objection being raised by either party during this period.