In Lidderdale's Executors v. The Executor of Robinson, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute between two executors over the distribution of an estate. At issue was whether or not one executor had acted improperly in distributing funds from the estate to himself and other creditors before satisfying all debts owed by the deceased. The court held that while it is permissible for an executor to pay some creditors ahead of others, he must do so with good faith and without prejudice towards any particular creditor. Furthermore, if there are sufficient assets remaining after paying off certain creditors then those assets should be used to satisfy other outstanding debts before being distributed among heirs or beneficiaries as part of their inheritance. Ultimately, this case established important principles regarding how estates should be managed and distributed upon death in order for them to remain equitable amongst all parties involved.

In Lidderdale's Executors v. The Executor of Robinson, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a creditor could recover on an open account against a debtor’s estate after the death of both parties. The majority opinion held that such recovery was not possible because it would be contrary to public policy and would create uncertainty in commercial transactions. However, Justice Story dissented from this decision and argued that there should be no bar to recovering on an open account when both parties have died since it is well established law that creditors can recover debts due them even if they are barred by statutes of limitations or other legal impediments during their lifetime. He further noted that allowing creditors to pursue claims against estates for debts owed them does not conflict with any public policy considerations as long as proper procedures are followed in making these claims known and proved before the court.