Shepherd v. Pepper was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 1811. The case involved a dispute between two individuals, Shepherd and Pepper, over a piece of land in the state of Virginia. Shepherd had purchased the land from the state, but Pepper claimed that he had a prior right to the land. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Shepherd, finding that Pepper had no prior right to the land and that Shepherd was the rightful owner. The Court held that the state had the right to sell the land to Shepherd, and that Pepper had no legal claim to the land. The decision established the principle that the state has the right to sell land to individuals, and that individuals have the right to purchase land from the state. The decision also established the principle that individuals have the right to challenge the validity of a state's sale of land.

In the Supreme Court case of Shepherd v. Pepper, Justice Black delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority's decision was contrary to established precedent and would lead to an unjust result. He noted that under prior decisions, a state court could not constitutionally deny relief on grounds of res judicata when there had been no actual adjudication or determination by any tribunal as to the merits of plaintiff’s claim. In this case, however, the majority held that even though no such adjudication had occurred in state court proceedings involving Shepherd’s claim against Pepper for damages resulting from breach of contract, those proceedings were sufficient to bar federal jurisdiction over his complaint. Justice Black maintained that this holding was inconsistent with prior cases and would allow states courts “to defeat rights created by Congress without affording litigants their day in court." He concluded by expressing his belief that it should be left up to Congress rather than judicial interpretation whether or not certain claims should be barred from federal jurisdiction due to preclusion doctrines like res judicata.