Elijah Peale, Trustee and Assignee of the Agricultural Bank of Mississippi, brought a suit against Martha Phipps and Mary Rice. The case was heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1850. At issue was whether or not Elijah Peale had legal title to certain lands that were mortgaged to him by Martha Phipps as security for a debt she owed to the bank. The court found that although Elijah Peale did have legal title to the land, he could not collect on it because there was no evidence presented at trial showing that he had taken possession of it prior to its being sold off under an execution issued from another court. Furthermore, since Charles Rice assisted his wife Mary in bringing her claim against Elijah Peale's title before this court, they were both held liable for costs incurred during litigation proceedings due their lack of success in proving their claims regarding ownership rights over said property.

In the case of Elijah Peale, Trustee and Assignee of the President, Directors, and Company of the Agricultural Bank of Mississippi v. Martha Phipps and Mary Rice (assisted by her husband Charles Rice), a dissenting opinion was issued. The dissent argued that although it is true that a married woman cannot sue or be sued in her own name without joining her husband as plaintiff or defendant in such suit; however this does not mean she has no right to bring an action on behalf of herself alone when joined with another party who can maintain such action independently from his wife's claim. In this particular case, since Martha Phipps had already been named as one plaintiff before Mary Rice was added to the suit - thus making them co-plaintiffs - there should have been no issue with allowing Mary to proceed with her individual claim against Elijah Peale without having to join Charles Rice as well. Therefore, according to the dissenters' view, both plaintiffs should have been allowed their day in court regardless if they were married women or not.