In the case of Bloomer v. Millinger, a dispute arose between two parties over an unpaid debt. The plaintiff, Bloomer, had loaned money to the defendant, Millinger and was seeking repayment in full with interest from him. In response to this claim for payment, Millinger argued that he should not be held liable due to his lack of knowledge about the terms of the agreement at its inception; however, it was determined by the court that ignorance is no excuse when it comes to contracts and agreements made between two parties. As such, they ruled in favor of Bloomers’s claim for repayment and ordered Millinger to pay back all monies owed plus interest as per their original agreement.

In Bloomer v. Millinger, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a married woman's separate property was not subject to her husband's debts and could not be taken by creditors without her consent. The majority opinion found that when a married woman acquired property before marriage or after marriage with separate funds, she had an absolute right to it which could not be divested by any act of her husband. The dissenting opinion argued that this decision would create confusion in state law as some states allowed for husbands to have control over their wives' assets while other states did not recognize such authority. Furthermore, the dissent argued that since common law recognized a wife’s legal incapacity due to coverture (the doctrine whereby all rights and obligations of a wife were subsumed under those of her husband), then allowing women exclusive control over their own assets would undermine centuries-old marital customs and traditions established by English common law. Ultimately, however, the majority opinion prevailed and married women were granted full ownership rights over their own premarital or post-marital property regardless if they lived in jurisdictions where coverture still applied or had been abolished altogether.