In the case of Kings County Savings Institution v. Blair, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a mortgage deed was valid and enforceable. The mortgage deed was given by the defendant, Blair, to the plaintiff, Kings County Savings Institution, in order to secure a loan. The deed was not recorded in the county clerk's office, as required by New York law. The Supreme Court held that the mortgage deed was valid and enforceable, despite the fact that it was not recorded. The Court reasoned that the recording requirement was intended to protect the public, and that since the plaintiff was aware of the mortgage deed, it was not necessary to record it in order to protect the public. The Court also held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the amount of the loan, plus interest, from the defendant.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Kings County Savings Institution v. Blair, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to established precedent and would lead to a great deal of confusion. He argued that under existing law, when an instrument is made payable on demand or at sight it must be presented for payment within a reasonable time after its issue; otherwise, if not so presented it will become stale and unenforceable by action. In this case, he noted that there had been no presentation of the note until more than two years after its date and thus it should have been held as stale and unenforceable against either party who signed it. Justice Field concluded his dissent by noting that while he did not agree with the majority's ruling in this case, he accepted their judgment as final since they were better able to determine what constituted justice between these parties than himself.