In the case of The United States v. John Rodman, Assignee of Robert M'Hardy, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a debt owed by an insolvent debtor could be collected from his assignee after it had been discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. The court held that such debts were not dischargeable and thus could still be collected from the assignee even though they had been discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. This decision established that creditors can still collect on their claims against an insolvent debtor's estate through its assignees even if those claims have already been discharged in bankruptcy proceedings.

In the case of The United States v. John Rodman, Assignee of Robert M'Hardy, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a federal court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a state court judgment concerning property rights in land that had been granted by Virginia prior to its cession to the United States. In this instance, Justice McLean dissented from the majority opinion and argued that since Congress has not provided for appeals in such cases, it is up to each individual state's courts as well as their respective legislatures to decide how these matters should be handled. He further noted that if Congress were allowed unfettered authority over all disputes involving lands within states which have ceded them then they would essentially be overriding those same states’ sovereignty and thus violating both constitutional principles and fundamental laws of justice. Ultimately he concluded that while there may be some instances where federal intervention is necessary or appropriate when dealing with questions regarding land grants made by former sovereigns (such as Virginia), this particular case did not meet those criteria and therefore should remain under exclusive control of Virginia’s courts.