In the case of George R. Sampson and Lewis W. Tappan, Merchants doing business under the names and firm of Sampson & Tappan, Claimants of the Ship Sarah, her Tackle, Apparel, and Furniture v Samuel Welsh et al., merchants from Philadelphia were accused by appellants for having wrongfully seized a ship called “Sarah” which was owned by them. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellants as they had proved that their title to said vessel was validly established through legal documents such as bills of sale etc., while on other hand respondents failed to prove any right or title over it whatsoever. Furthermore court also held that since no lien existed against said vessel at time when it was seized so therefore all damages caused due to wrongful seizure must be paid by respondents who acted negligently without proper investigation into ownership rights before taking possession thereof.

In the case of Sampson & Tappan v. Welsh, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a ship and its cargo were subject to attachment by creditors in order to satisfy debts owed by one of the owners. The majority opinion held that they were not, as there had been no agreement between the parties regarding such an arrangement. However, Justice Grier dissented from this ruling on two grounds: firstly, he argued that it was within common law for creditors to attach property owned jointly by debtors; secondly, he maintained that even if there had been no prior agreement between them in this regard, then it should be implied due to their relationship as partners and co-owners of a business venture. Ultimately though his dissenting opinion did not prevail and so Sampson & Tappan's claim against Samuel Welsh et al failed.