Slaughter's Administrator v. Gerson was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1871. The case involved a dispute between the administrator of the estate of a deceased man, and the man's widow. The administrator of the estate argued that the widow was not entitled to a portion of the estate, as the deceased man had made a will that excluded her from any inheritance. The widow argued that the will was invalid, as it had not been properly executed. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with the widow, ruling that the will was invalid due to the fact that it had not been properly executed. The Court held that the will was not valid under the laws of the state in which it was executed, and thus the widow was entitled to a portion of the estate. This ruling established the precedent that a will must be properly executed in order to be valid.

In Slaughter's Administrator v. Gerson, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by a non-resident against another non-resident in regards to property located within the state. The majority opinion held that such jurisdiction did exist and affirmed the decision of the lower court. However, Justice Field dissented from this ruling on two grounds: firstly, he argued that Congress had not given states authority to exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants; secondly, he maintained that allowing states to do so would be unconstitutional as it would violate due process rights guaranteed under Article IV of the Constitution. He concluded his dissent by asserting that if Congress wished for such power to be granted then they should pass legislation explicitly granting it rather than leaving it up to individual states' courts or legislatures.