Elias Kane brought a case against Gabriel Paul, the executor of Edward Coursault's estate. Kane claimed that he was entitled to certain property from the estate due to an agreement between himself and Coursault prior to his death. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Paul, finding that there was no evidence presented by Kane which proved that such an agreement existed or had been fulfilled. Furthermore, they found that even if it did exist, it would be invalid as it violated public policy and constituted a fraud on creditors who were owed money by Coursault's estate at the time of his death. Ultimately, this ruling denied any claim made by Elias Kane for property from Edward Coursault’s estate.

In the case of Elias Kane vs. Gabriel Paul, Executor of Edward Coursault, Deceased, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed from Coursault to Kane was valid and enforceable. The majority opinion held that it was not because there were certain conditions in the deed which had not been fulfilled by either party. However, Justice McLean dissented from this decision and argued that although some of these conditions had not been met yet at the time of trial, they could still be fulfilled in future as long as both parties agreed on them. He further stated that if one party refused to fulfill their obligations under such an agreement then they should be liable for damages instead of invalidating the entire contract between them. In conclusion he argued that since neither side had violated any laws or breached any contracts with each other so far then it would be unjust to deny Kane his rights under this particular deed without giving him a chance to prove himself first before making such a judgement call against him