In Stewart v. Ingle and Others, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case concerning an appeal from a decision by the Circuit Court for Georgia. The appellant, William Stewart, had brought suit against several defendants in order to recover damages for trespass on his land. The circuit court found that one of the defendants was liable but dismissed all other claims due to lack of evidence or jurisdiction over them. On appeal, Stewart argued that he should have been allowed to amend his complaint so as to include more details about each defendant's involvement in trespassing on his property; however, Chief Justice John Marshall held that this amendment would be too late since it came after judgment had already been rendered by the lower court and thus could not be considered at this stage in proceedings. Ultimately, Marshall affirmed the decision of the circuit court and denied Stewart’s request for amendment.

In Stewart v. Ingle and Others, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over an action brought by a citizen of another state against citizens of the forum state. The majority opinion held that it did not, as such suits were prohibited under Article III Section 2 of the Constitution. However, Justice Johnson dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that Congress had never passed any law prohibiting such suits; secondly, he maintained that even if there were such a prohibition in place it would be unconstitutional because it violated both due process and equal protection principles enshrined in the Fifth Amendment. He concluded his dissent with an assertion that "the power to grant justice is inherent in every sovereignty."