Were there precedent cases in McCulloch v Maryland?

No. There were no established precedents for McCulloch v. Maryland, the first US Supreme Court case dealing with the implied constitutional powers of Congress. McCullough was an early challenge to the division of power between the state and federal governments, prompted by the vague wording of the Tenth Amendment.

The decision in this case set a precedent for future cases, such as Gibbons v. Ogden, (1824).

Additional Note:

Chief Justice Marshall referenced a Connecticut case, Montague v. Richardson, 24 Conn. 348, to explain his interpretation of the Tenth Amendment as being similar to a judge's construction of a particular state statute: "A pension is a bounty for past services rendered to the public. It is mainly designed to assist the pensioner in providing for his daily wants. Statutes protecting his interest in it, until so used, are of a remedial nature and entitled to a liberal construction"

Marshall's corollary:

"We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the Government are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended. But we think the sound construction of the Constitution must allow to the national legislature that discretion with respect to the means by which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it in the manner most beneficial to the people. Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are Constitutional."

Case Citation:

McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)