In the case of Ingle v. Jones, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid. The contract in question was between a husband and wife, and it stated that the husband would pay the wife a certain amount of money each month in exchange for her relinquishing her right to alimony. The wife argued that the contract was invalid because it was against public policy. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the husband, finding that the contract was valid. The Court reasoned that the contract was not against public policy because it was a voluntary agreement between two parties, and it did not involve any fraud or coercion. Furthermore, the Court noted that the contract was not against the law, and that it was not contrary to any established public policy. The Court also noted that the contract was not against the interests of the wife, as she was receiving a certain amount of money each month in exchange for her relinquishing her right to alimony. The Court concluded that the contract was valid and enforceable.

In the case of Ingle v. Jones, Justice Swayne wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority's decision was incorrect and should be reversed. He argued that under the law as it existed at the time, an executor had no authority to sell real estate without first obtaining permission from a court of equity or probate. The majority held that such permission was not necessary because there were no creditors who could have been affected by such a sale; however, Justice Swayne disagreed with this reasoning and stated that even if there were no creditors involved, an executor still needed to obtain approval from either a court of equity or probate before selling any real estate belonging to an estate. In his dissent, Justice Swayne concluded by stating that since courts are established for protecting property rights and preventing frauds upon estates, they must be consulted prior to any sales being made on behalf of those estates regardless of whether or not there are any creditors involved in said transactions.