In French, Trustee v. Hay et al., the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a deed of trust was valid. The deed of trust was created by a man named William Hay, who had borrowed money from a man named William French. Hay had given French a deed of trust, which was a document that allowed French to take possession of Hay's property if Hay failed to repay the loan. The Supreme Court held that the deed of trust was valid. The Court noted that the deed of trust was properly executed and that it was clear that Hay intended to give French the right to take possession of his property if he failed to repay the loan. The Court also noted that the deed of trust was not contrary to public policy and that it was not unconscionable. The Court concluded that the deed of trust was valid and that French had the right to take possession of Hay's property if Hay failed to repay the loan. This decision established that a deed of trust is a valid and enforceable contract.

In French, Trustee v. Hay et al., the Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether a deed of trust created by an individual in favor of another could be enforced against creditors and purchasers without notice. The majority opinion held that such a deed would not be enforceable unless it had been recorded or otherwise made known to those who might have an interest in the property at issue. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that the law should recognize deeds of trust as valid even if they are not recorded or publicly disclosed. He argued that individuals should have the right to enter into private contracts without fear of them being invalidated due to lack of public disclosure and noted that there is no legal requirement for recording such documents under existing laws. Furthermore, he stated that allowing parties to keep their transactions private would promote economic efficiency by reducing transaction costs associated with record-keeping requirements imposed on both buyers and sellers alike.