This Supreme Court case involved Robert White, the plaintiff in error, and William S. Nicholls, William Robinson, Otho M. Linthicum, Edward M. Linthicum, Raphael Semmes, Paul Stevens and Charles C. Fulton as defendants in error. The dispute was over a contract between White and the defendants for the sale of land located on Kent Island in Maryland's Chesapeake Bay area that had been owned by one of the defendant’s ancestors since 1658 but was sold to White without any title or deed being provided to him at closing due to an ongoing legal dispute with another party who claimed ownership rights over it through inheritance from his ancestor prior to its sale by them to White. The court found that while there were some issues with regards to whether or not a valid contract existed between all parties involved given these circumstances surrounding this property transaction; ultimately they ruled that because no title or deed had been provided at closing then none could be enforced against either party which meant neither side could recover damages from each other based on their agreement nor did either have any claim of ownership over said property going forward as well as no right for reimbursement of funds paid out during this transaction process either way making it null and void overall thus ending this particular case before them accordingly

In the dissenting opinion of Robert White v. William S. Nicholls et al., Justice McLean argued that the plaintiff had a valid claim to land in Maryland, and should have been allowed to present evidence on his behalf at trial. The majority decision held that since White was not able to produce a deed or other proof of ownership, he could not prove title and therefore did not have standing in court. However, Justice McLean disagreed with this ruling as there were many circumstances under which an individual may possess property without having legal documents proving it; for example if they inherited it from their family or purchased it from another party who did not hold clear title themselves. He also noted that even though no deed existed for the disputed land, there were witnesses who could testify as to its possession by White's father prior to his death - testimony which should be considered by the court before any judgement is made regarding ownership rights over said property.