In Washington and Sanders Taylor v. John Doe, Ex Dem. Austin Miller, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case involving an appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant in an action on assumpsit brought by plaintiffs against him for money had and received to their use. The plaintiffs alleged that they were entitled to recover $1,000 from the defendant as payment for certain services rendered by them at his request; however, no written agreement was produced between them regarding these services or any other matter related thereto. The court held that there was insufficient evidence presented to support recovery under this claim since it failed to establish either an express contract or one implied in fact between parties which would have obligated the defendant’s payment of such sum due upon completion of those services provided by plaintiff’s at his request. Therefore, judgment was affirmed in favor of Defendant John Doe with costs taxed against Plaintiffs Washington and Sanders Taylor

In the case of Washington and Sanders Taylor v. John Doe, ex dem Austin Miller, the dissenting opinion was that a writ of error should have been issued to reverse a judgment in favor of the defendant. The majority had held that such an action could not be taken because it would amount to granting relief from a final judgment which is prohibited by law. However, Justice McLean argued that this was an exceptional case where justice demanded such relief as there were serious errors made in the proceedings below which resulted in prejudice against plaintiffs' rights. He further noted that if no remedy existed for these wrongs then "the administration of justice must be greatly impaired." Ultimately he concluded with his belief that issuing a writ of error would not violate any legal principle and thus should have been allowed so as to ensure fairness and equity between parties involved in litigation.