Wise v. Withers was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1806. The dispute arose when John Wise, an attorney from Virginia, sued William Withers for failing to pay him $1,000 that had been awarded as part of a judgment against another party in 1799. In his defense, Withers argued that he should not be held liable because the statute of limitations had expired and thus barred any action on Wise's claim. The Supreme Court disagreed and ruled in favor of Wise finding that although the original cause of action may have been extinguished due to expiration of the statute of limitations period, it did not prevent enforcement through other means such as execution or attachment proceedings which were available under Virginia law at the time. This decision established important precedent regarding how statutes are applied with respect to claims brought before courts after their expiration date has passed.

In the case of Wise v. Withers, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should not have granted an injunction to prevent the defendant from selling property that was part of a trust created by his father. The majority had held that since there were no specific instructions in the will regarding how or when this property could be sold, it was up to the discretion of those managing it and thus they could not interfere with any sale made by them. However, Marshall disagreed and argued that even though there were no explicit instructions on how or when to sell this land, it still constituted part of a trust created for certain beneficiaries who would benefit from its proceeds; as such he believed an injunction should have been issued preventing any sale until further guidance on what to do with it was provided either through legislation or other means. He also noted that if such sales did occur without proper authorization then those responsible for making them may be liable for damages incurred due to their actions.