David Bush brought a case against James I. Person, the administrator of Maborn Cooper's estate, to the Supreme Court. Bush argued that he had been wrongfully denied his inheritance from Cooper's will and was seeking damages for this loss. The court found in favor of Person as they determined that there were no grounds for Bush’s claim since it was not established whether or not he was actually related to Cooper and thus eligible to receive an inheritance under the terms of his will. Furthermore, even if it could be proven that he did have some relation with Cooper, any rights which may have existed would still be extinguished due to the fact that too much time had passed between when the will was written and when Bush made his claim on its contents. Ultimately, this ruling meant that David Bush received nothing from Maborn Coopers' estate despite having originally believed himself entitled to an inheritance from it.

In the case of David Bush v. James I. Person, the dissenting opinion was that a creditor's right to collect on a debt should not be limited by state statutes of limitations when it comes to debts owed by an estate in probate proceedings. The majority opinion held that such debts were subject to state statutes and could only be collected within the time frame set out in those laws; however, Justice McLean argued that this would unfairly limit creditors' rights and lead to unjust results since estates are often slow-moving affairs with many parties involved who may delay or impede progress for various reasons beyond anyone's control. He further argued that if creditors had no recourse after these delays then they would suffer greatly due to their inability to collect what is rightfully theirs from an estate which has been settled but simply cannot pay them due to circumstances outside their control - something he felt was fundamentally unfair and contrary both common law principles as well as natural justice itself.