Julia Thompson, tenant, appealed a case against Alice Tolmie and others. The dispute was over the ownership of certain lands in Pennsylvania. Julia claimed that she had been living on the land for many years and thus held title to it by adverse possession. However, Alice argued that her family had owned the land since 1790 and therefore still held legal title to it despite Julia's long-term occupancy of the property. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Alice due to lack of evidence supporting Julia's claim; they found that although she may have lived on the land for some time, there was no proof that she ever paid rent or taxes as required under Pennsylvania law in order for her claim of adverse possession to be valid. As such, they ruled in favor of Alice Tolmie and upheld her family’s legal title over the disputed lands.

Justice Story delivered the dissenting opinion in this case. He argued that the tenant, Julia Thompson, was entitled to a jury trial on her claim of ejectment against Alice Tolmie and others. Justice Story reasoned that since ejectment had been recognized as an action at common law for centuries prior to the adoption of state constitutions or statutes, it should be treated as such in this case. He further noted that there were no provisions in either the Massachusetts Constitution or any statute which abrogated a tenant's right to a jury trial upon an action for ejectment. Therefore, he concluded that Julia Thompson was entitled to have her cause tried by a jury and not decided solely by judges sitting without one. In conclusion, Justice Story asserted his belief that denying tenants their right to have their cases heard before juries would lead them into "the most oppressive tyranny."