In Morgan's Heirs v. Morgan et al, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case concerning inheritance rights and property disputes between two families. The dispute arose when William Morgan died without leaving a will or any other legal document to determine how his estate should be divided among his heirs. His widow, Mary Ann, claimed that she was entitled to one-third of her husband’s estate as provided by law in Maryland at the time; however, several of William’s children from previous marriages argued that they were also entitled to their father’s assets under common law principles of inheritance. After considering both sides' arguments and relevant state laws on succession and intestacy, the court ruled in favor of Mary Ann and held that she was legally entitled to one-third share in her late husband's estate according to Maryland statutes governing intestate succession.

In Morgan's Heirs v. Morgan et al, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a deed of gift from Thomas Morgan to his son John had been revoked by an earlier will made by Thomas in which he bequeathed all his property equally among his children. The majority opinion held that the deed of gift was valid and binding on both parties, but Justice Story dissented. He argued that since there were no words of revocation in either document, it could not be assumed that one instrument superseded another; rather, they should both stand together as evidence of what Thomas intended for his estate. Furthermore, Story reasoned that if the court found otherwise then it would set a dangerous precedent whereby any subsequent will or deed could potentially revoke prior ones without explicitly stating so. Therefore he concluded that while the two documents may appear contradictory at first glance, they must both remain intact and respected as part of Thomas' wishes for how to divide up his estate upon death