In French v. Gapen, the United States Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable. The plaintiff, French, had entered into a contract with the defendant, Gapen, to purchase a tract of land. The contract stated that Gapen would pay French a certain amount of money for the land, and that French would then convey the land to Gapen. However, Gapen failed to pay the money as agreed, and French sued for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court noted that the contract was clear and unambiguous, and that the parties had agreed to all of its terms. Furthermore, the Court held that the contract was supported by consideration, meaning that both parties had given something of value in exchange for the other's promise. As such, the Court held that French was entitled to recover damages from Gapen for breach of contract.

In French v. Gapen, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable under Illinois law. The majority opinion held that the contract was not valid because it lacked consideration and did not meet certain other requirements of Illinois law. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that while there may have been some technical deficiencies in the agreement, they were minor enough that they should not invalidate an otherwise binding contract. He argued further that even if there had been more serious issues with the agreement's validity, those issues could have been addressed through legal proceedings instead of simply voiding it outright as had happened here. In conclusion, he felt strongly that courts should be reluctant to declare contracts null and void unless absolutely necessary due to their importance in facilitating commerce and economic growth throughout society.