In the case of Hugh Boyle v. James W. Zacharie and Samuel H. Turner, Boyle was appealing a decision made by the Circuit Court of Virginia which had dismissed his bill in equity against Zacharie and Turner for an alleged breach of contract between them regarding a certain tract of land located in Kentucky. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's ruling that there was no evidence to support any agreement between the parties as to how they would divide profits from selling timber on said land or that either party had agreed to pay damages if such profits were not divided according to their understanding. Furthermore, it held that even if there had been an agreement, it could not be enforced due to lack of consideration since neither party provided anything valuable in exchange for its performance under this purported contract; thus, Boyle’s appeal was denied and he failed to recover any compensation from Zacharie or Turner for his losses associated with this transaction.

In the case of Hugh Boyle v. James W. Zacharie and Samuel H. Turner, Justice McLean wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority’s decision was not supported by law or precedent. He noted that under Maryland law, an executor had no authority to sell real estate without first obtaining permission from the court; however, this requirement had been waived in this particular case due to a technicality involving jurisdiction over certain parties involved in the sale of property owned by Boyle's deceased father-in-law. Justice McLean believed that such a waiver should only be granted when it is necessary for justice to be done and not simply because one party has failed to appear before court as required by law; thus, he concluded that there was no legal basis for waiving the requirement and overturning previous decisions on similar matters made by other courts within Maryland.