John Arthurs, John Nicholson, Jonas R. McClintock and William Stewart (collectively known as "Arthurs, Nicholson & Co.") brought a case against Jesse Hart to the Supreme Court of the United States. The dispute was over an unpaid debt that Hart had incurred with Arthurs, Nicholson & Co., which he refused to pay despite their repeated demands for payment. In his defense, Hart argued that he had been misled by one of the partners in Arthurs, Nicholson & Co., who told him that if he paid part of what was owed then they would forgive the rest; however this promise was never fulfilled and so no further payments were made on the debt. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Arthurs et al., finding that there was sufficient evidence to prove their claim against Hart and ordering him to pay them back all monies due plus interest accrued since it first became overdue.

In the case of Arthurs, Nicholson, and Co. v. Hart, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when one party had not received any consideration for their part in it. The majority opinion held that since there was no consideration given by either side, the contract was voidable at law and could not be enforced. However, Justice Grier dissented from this decision on the grounds that even though neither party had provided any form of compensation or benefit to each other as part of their agreement, they both still intended to enter into a binding contractual relationship with each other which should have been respected by the court. He argued that if such contracts were allowed to stand without providing some form of legal protection then individuals would be left vulnerable and unable to rely upon agreements made in good faith with others due to lack of enforcement mechanisms available through courts or legislatures.