In the case of Mary Ann Connor v. Henry Bradley and Mary, his wife, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed from an infant heir could be enforced against them. The court held that it could not because infants are incapable of entering into contracts or making binding agreements with others. Furthermore, any agreement made by an infant is voidable at their option when they reach majority age and can make decisions for themselves without parental consent or influence. Therefore, in this case the deed was deemed invalid as it had been executed by an infant who lacked capacity to enter into such a contract legally binding on him or her.

In the case of Mary Ann Connor v. Henry Bradley and Mary, his wife, the dissenting opinion argued that a deed from an infant to another party should not be considered valid unless it was proven that there had been some benefit received by the infant in exchange for their conveyance. The majority opinion held that such deeds were generally binding on infants regardless of whether they had received any benefit or not; however, this dissent disagreed with this position and argued instead that if no consideration was given to the infant then their deed should be deemed invalid as it could potentially lead to them being taken advantage of due to their lack of legal understanding. Furthermore, even if consideration was provided at one point in time but later revoked before completion then again such a deed would still remain invalid as it would have been entered into under false pretenses.