In Ruel C. Gridley, Clarissa H. Beebe, Sarah P. Snyder and Charles Snyder v David Wynant, the appellants were challenging a decision by the Supreme Court of Ohio that had granted a motion to dismiss their complaint against Wynant for failing to pay them money he owed from an agreement made between him and the appellants’ father before his death in 1853. The appellants argued that they should be allowed to pursue their claim as representatives of their deceased father's estate since it was not barred by any statute or law at the time when it arose; however, Wynant argued that such claims could only be brought within one year after the decedent's death according to Ohio statutes enacted in 1851-1852 which limited creditors' rights against estates of deceased persons unless suit is commenced within one year after such person's decease. After considering both sides’ arguments, the court ruled in favor of Wynant on grounds that there was no dispute over whether or not those statutes applied retroactively and thus barred any action taken more than one year after decedent's death even if it predated those laws being passed.

In Ruel C. Gridley, Clarissa H. Beebe, Sarah P. Snyder and Charles Snyder v David Wynant, the Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether a deed of conveyance from one party to another could be revoked by the grantor after it had been accepted by the grantee and acted upon in good faith for several years without any knowledge or notice that such an act would be considered invalid. The majority opinion held that since there was no fraud involved on either side of the transaction, nor any other circumstances which might render it voidable at law or equity; therefore, once accepted and acted upon in good faith for several years without knowledge or notice of its being invalidated then it should remain valid despite objections raised later on by either party to revoke said deed due to some technicality not known prior to acceptance. However, Justice Nelson dissented arguing that if a contract is found defective under existing laws then neither ignorance nor lapse of time can make up for this defect as parties must abide by all applicable laws when entering into contracts regardless if they are aware of them at first or not.