This Supreme Court case involved a dispute over the ownership of a piece of land in the state of Virginia. The plaintiff, Mamie Parcher, claimed that she was the rightful owner of the land, while the defendant, Cuddy, argued that he was the rightful owner. The case was heard by the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled in favor of Mamie Parcher. The Court found that Mamie Parcher had a valid claim to the land, as she had inherited it from her father, who had purchased it from the original owner. The Court also found that Cuddy had no valid claim to the land, as he had not purchased it from the original owner. Furthermore, the Court found that Cuddy had not taken any steps to establish his ownership of the land, such as filing a deed or registering it with the local government. The Court ultimately ruled in favor of Mamie Parcher, finding that she was the rightful owner of the land. This ruling established that the original owner's title to the land was valid and that Mamie Parcher was the rightful owner. The Court's decision was a victory for Mamie Parcher, as it allowed her to retain ownership of the land and prevented Cuddy from claiming it as his own.

In the case of The Mamie.; Parcher & Another v. Cuddy, Administrator, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a deed given by an emancipated slave to her daughter should be enforced. Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in this case and argued that while it is true that slaves were not allowed to own property prior to emancipation, they had been able to acquire property through gifts from their masters or other individuals since at least 1792. Furthermore, he argued that if a former slave could give away his or her own personal effects upon death then there was no reason why they should not also be able to make valid deeds for real estate during their lifetime as well. He concluded by stating that any law which would prevent such actions would violate both natural justice and equity and thus must be declared void.