This Supreme Court case is between the Lessee of Ambrose Walden, Plaintiff in Error, and John Craig's Heirs and Others, Defendants in Error. The dispute was over a tract of land located on the south side of Cumberland River in Tennessee that had been granted to Ambrose Walden by patent from North Carolina prior to its cession to the United States. The plaintiff claimed title under this grant while defendants asserted their own title through an entry made with a surveyor appointed by Virginia after it assumed jurisdiction over the area following cession. At issue was whether or not Virginia could legally exercise authority over lands previously granted by another state before cession occurred. In deciding this case, Chief Justice Taney held that although states may have concurrent jurisdiction during periods when two governments are claiming sovereignty over one territory, they cannot interfere with existing grants already issued by other states prior to such period; thus confirming plaintiff’s right as lessee under his original grant from North Carolina.

In this case, the plaintiff argued that a deed of conveyance from Ambrose Walden to John Craig was invalid because it had not been properly acknowledged. The Supreme Court disagreed and held that the deed was valid as long as there were sufficient facts in evidence to prove its execution. However, Justice McLean dissented from this opinion on two grounds: firstly, he believed that an acknowledgement should have been made before a justice or other officer authorized by law; secondly, he argued that even if such an acknowledgement had taken place without proper authorization, it would still be insufficient unless accompanied by proof of delivery of possession or some other act indicating actual transfer of title. He concluded his dissent with the statement "that no court can give validity to a deed which is void in itself."