In the case of Henry Wright, William Carothers, Robert Denniston, William Patton, Thomas Burman and James Robertson (Plaintiffs in Error) vs. The Lessee of Levi Hollingsworth and John Kaighn (Defendants in Error), the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties had been breached. The Plaintiffs argued that they had entered into an agreement with the Defendants for them to purchase certain lands at a set price but that when payment was due it was not made as agreed upon. The Defendants countered by arguing that no such agreement existed and therefore there could be no breach of contract on their part. After examining all evidence presented before them, the Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs finding that indeed there had been a breach of contract on behalf of the Defendants which resulted in damages being awarded to those who brought suit against them.

In the dissenting opinion of this US Supreme Court case, Justice Story argued that the court should have granted a new trial to the plaintiffs. He believed that there was sufficient evidence presented in favor of their claim and that they had been denied justice by being deprived of an opportunity to prove it. Furthermore, he noted that if any errors were committed during the original trial, such as improper instructions or misdirection from the judge, then those mistakes could not be corrected on appeal due to lack of jurisdiction. As such, he concluded that granting a new trial would be necessary for ensuring fairness and justice for all parties involved in this case.