Hall v. Leigh and Al was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1814 that dealt with the issue of whether or not an individual could be held liable for debts incurred before they became citizens of the United States. The plaintiff, Hall, had been born in England but moved to America where he married and acquired property. He then returned to England and died there without having become a citizen of the US. His widow sued two individuals who had purchased some of his American property from his estate after his death claiming that since her husband hadn’t become a citizen prior to his death, she wasn’t responsible for any debt he may have owed on it at the time of sale. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled against Hall's widow finding that even though her husband hadn't become an American citizen prior to his death, she still remained liable for any debt associated with their jointly owned property as long as it was within their power to pay such debts when due regardless if they were citizens or not.

In Hall v. Leigh and Al, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced if it had been made without consideration. The majority opinion held that the contract was unenforceable because there had been no consideration given by either party in exchange for its performance. However, Justice Story dissented from this decision on the grounds that an agreement should not be invalidated simply because it lacked consideration; instead, he argued that courts should look at all of the circumstances surrounding such agreements before determining their enforceability or lack thereof. He further noted that contracts lacking consideration were often valid under English common law and thus ought to receive similar treatment in American courts as well. As such, Justice Story concluded his dissent by arguing against enforcing a strict rule requiring all contracts to have some form of consideration in order for them to be legally binding.