Violett v. Patton was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1809. The dispute involved two parties, Violett and Patton, who were both claiming title to land located in Kentucky. In order to determine which party had rightful ownership of the property, the court examined various documents related to its history including deeds and surveys from previous owners as well as evidence provided by witnesses on behalf of each side. After careful consideration of all available information, it was determined that Violett held legal title to the land due to his possession being uninterrupted for more than twenty years prior to Patton's claim being made. This ruling established an important precedent regarding adverse possession laws in America and set forth standards for how such disputes should be handled going forward.

In Violett v. Patton, Chief Justice Marshall wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should not have granted an injunction to prevent the defendant from selling property belonging to the plaintiff. He believed that granting such an injunction would be too broad and could potentially interfere with other rights of citizens, including those related to contracts and commerce. Furthermore, he noted that it was unclear whether or not this case fell within the jurisdiction of equity courts as opposed to common law courts. As such, Marshall concluded that there were insufficient grounds for granting an injunction in this particular case and recommended denying it instead.