In William Fountain, Administrator de bonis non cum testamento annexo of Frederick Kohne, Deceased v. William Ravenel, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a creditor had the right to sue for payment from an estate that had already been distributed among heirs and legatees. The court held that creditors could not pursue claims against estates after they were closed by distribution or settlement because it would be unfair to allow them to do so when other creditors did not have similar rights. Furthermore, allowing such suits would create uncertainty in property titles and disrupt settled expectations of those who received distributions from the estate. Therefore, this case established precedent that creditors cannot bring suit against an estate once it has been distributed among its rightful beneficiaries.

In the case of William Fountain, Administrator de bonis non cum testamento annexo of Frederick Kohne, Deceased v. William Ravenel, the dissenting opinion was that a court should not be able to set aside an executor's decision on how to distribute assets from an estate if it is within their power and discretion as outlined in the will. The majority opinion held that because there were no specific instructions in the will regarding this particular asset distribution issue, then it was up to a court to decide what would be fair for all parties involved. However, Justice Grier argued that since there was nothing preventing or prohibiting such action by the executor under South Carolina law at that time (which governed this case), then his decision should stand and not be overturned by a court. He further stated that courts have no right or authority to interfere with matters which are left solely within an executor's discretion unless they can prove fraud or bad faith on behalf of said executor.