In the case of William H. Jones, James B. Wells, John Chain, Jonas A. Castaline, Philip C. Paul, William R. Roberts and James W Byrne (plaintiffs in error) v Thomas M League (defendant), the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a contract between two parties could be enforced if it had been made without consideration or any other form of legal obligation binding them together at the time of its formation. The plaintiffs argued that they were entitled to recover damages from the defendant for breach of an oral agreement he had made with them regarding certain land transactions; however, since there was no consideration given by either party when making this agreement and therefore no legally binding obligations created between them at that time according to common law principles governing contracts in force at that time –the court ruled against their claim on those grounds alone and dismissed their suit accordingly .

The dissenting opinion in this case argued that the plaintiffs had been wrongfully denied their right to a jury trial. The majority opinion held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to a jury trial because they had failed to make an appropriate demand for one before filing suit. However, the dissent argued that such a requirement was unnecessary and contrary to established law, as it would effectively deny individuals of their constitutional rights without due process of law. Furthermore, since there was no dispute over any material facts in this case, it should have gone directly to the court for decision rather than being tried by a jury. Ultimately, while recognizing that some cases may require special circumstances where juries are inappropriate or unavailable, the dissent concluded that those conditions did not exist here and thus found fault with denying these plaintiffs their right to be heard by a jury of peers.