In Young and Al v. Black, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case involving a dispute over land in South Carolina. The plaintiffs, John Young and Thomas Al, argued that they had purchased two tracts of land from William Black in 1806 but were unable to obtain legal title due to an error on Black's part when he conveyed it. They sought damages for their losses as well as compensation for improvements made on the property since then. The defendants argued that there was no evidence of any agreement between them and therefore no basis for recovery by the plaintiffs. Ultimately, Chief Justice Marshall ruled in favor of Young and Al finding that although there was some uncertainty about whether or not an actual contract existed between them all parties acted under good faith assumptions which should be honored by law; thus awarding damages to both sides accordingly.

In the case of Young and Al v. Black, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should not have dismissed the appeal from an earlier decision by a lower court. He noted that while it was true that there had been no formal assignment of error on appeal, this did not necessarily mean that none existed; rather, he believed it to be possible for errors to exist without being formally assigned or even noticed by counsel. Furthermore, Marshall argued that if such errors were present then they ought to be considered and corrected as part of due process regardless of whether or not they had been properly assigned at trial. In conclusion, Chief Justice Marshall asserted his belief in the importance of allowing appeals when necessary so as to ensure justice is served fairly and equitably throughout all levels of our judicial system.