In the case of Henrietta Amis, Executrix and William Perkins, Executor of Junius Amis, Deceased v. David Myers, a dispute arose over whether or not an agreement between two parties was valid. The appellants argued that they had entered into a contract with the respondent to purchase certain land in North Carolina for $1,000; however the respondent denied this claim and refused to convey title to them. The Supreme Court held that there was no evidence presented by either party which could prove that any such contract existed between them and thus ruled in favor of the respondent. This decision established precedent on how contracts must be proven before being enforced by courts - namely through clear evidence demonstrating their existence as well as all relevant terms agreed upon by both parties involved.

In the case of Henrietta Amis, Executrix, and William Perkins, Executor, of Junius Amis v. David Myers, the dissenting opinion was that a contract between two parties should be enforced even if it is not in writing. The majority opinion held that an oral agreement to transfer land could not be enforced because it did not meet the Statute of Frauds requirement for written contracts involving real estate transfers. However Justice Daniel argued that this would lead to injustice as there were witnesses who testified to having heard both parties agree on terms regarding the sale and transfer of property. He believed that such testimony should have been sufficient evidence for enforcing an oral contract since there had been no fraud or mistake involved in its formation. Furthermore he noted how requiring all contracts involving real estate transfers to be in writing would create hardship for those who are illiterate or unable to access legal services due their financial situation or other circumstances beyond their control