In Parker v. Rule's Lessee, the United States Supreme Court held that a state court could not exercise jurisdiction over land claims arising from grants made by the federal government prior to the adoption of its Constitution. The case arose when William Rule sued John Parker in Virginia state court for possession of certain lands located in Kentucky which had been granted to him by Congress before Kentucky became a state and was admitted into the Union under its own constitution. The Supreme Court found that since these lands were granted by Congress, they were subject only to federal law and thus outside of Virginia's jurisdiction. As such, it ruled that Virginia courts lacked authority over this dispute and dismissed Rule’s claim against Parker. This decision established an important precedent regarding states' ability to adjudicate disputes involving federally-granted property rights within their borders

In Parker v. Rule's Lessee, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a tenant had the right to bring an ejectment suit against another tenant who had been granted a lease by the original landlord after his own lease expired. The majority opinion held that such suits were not allowed and that tenants could only seek relief from their landlords in cases of wrongful eviction or other breaches of contract. Justice Johnson dissented, arguing that tenants should be able to sue each other for wrongfully occupying land when they have no legal claim on it. He argued that allowing this type of action would protect both parties' rights and prevent disputes between them from escalating into costly litigation over title or possession of property. Furthermore, he noted that if one party is found guilty in such an action then they must pay damages for any losses suffered by the other party due to their unlawful occupation of land which would provide further incentive for people not to unlawfully occupy someone else's property without permission or legal authority