Furman v. Nichol was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state could tax a federal employee. The case was brought by William Furman, a federal employee, who argued that the state of Georgia had no right to tax his salary. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Furman, holding that the state of Georgia could not tax a federal employee's salary. The Court reasoned that the federal government had exclusive authority over its employees and that the state of Georgia could not interfere with this authority. The Court also held that the state of Georgia could not tax a federal employee's salary because it would be a violation of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. This case established the principle that states cannot tax federal employees and that the federal government has exclusive authority over its employees.

In Furman v. Nichol, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a state statute which allowed for an executor to be appointed by will was unconstitutional because it violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The majority opinion argued that such statutes were in violation of equal protection under law and could not stand as written. Justice Field dissented from this ruling, arguing that there was no constitutional impediment to allowing states to pass laws providing for appointment by will if they so chose. He further argued that since wills are private contracts between individuals, any interference with them should only occur when absolutely necessary and then only after careful consideration has been given to all relevant facts and circumstances surrounding each particular case. In conclusion, he stated his belief that these types of statutes did not violate any fundamental rights or principles protected by either federal or state constitutions and thus should remain valid until otherwise determined by Congress or other competent authority.