In French v. Fyan et al., the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable. The contract in question was between the plaintiff, French, and the defendants, Fyan et al. French had agreed to purchase a tract of land from Fyan et al. for a certain sum of money. However, Fyan et al. had failed to deliver the deed to the land as promised. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court reasoned that the contract was supported by consideration, meaning that both parties had given something of value in exchange for the other's promise. The Court also found that the contract was not void for lack of consideration, as the defendants had promised to deliver the deed to the land. The Court concluded that the contract was valid and enforceable, and that French was entitled to the deed to the land as promised. The Court ordered Fyan et al. to deliver the deed to French.

In French v. Fyan et al., the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a deed of trust executed by the plaintiff, John French, in favor of his brother-in-law and sister-in-law constituted an absolute conveyance or merely a security for debt. The majority opinion held that it was a security for debt and not an absolute conveyance because there were no words indicating that it was intended as such. Justice Field dissented from this decision on the grounds that when taken together with other evidence presented at trial, including testimony from witnesses who had knowledge of the transaction between Mr. French and his brother-in-law and sister in law, he believed there was sufficient evidence to show that it did constitute an absolute conveyance rather than just being used as security for debt repayment. He argued further that if this were true then Mr. French would be entitled to recover damages since he had been deprived of title without due process or compensation under state law which required him to do so before conveying title away from himself