In Morgan v. Reintzel, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable even though it had not been signed by either party. The case involved a dispute over an agreement to purchase land in Kentucky from John Reintzel for $1,000. William Morgan claimed he had agreed to buy the property but never paid or signed any documents related to the transaction. However, both parties testified that they had verbally agreed on all terms of sale and witnesses corroborated their testimony. The court held that verbal contracts are just as binding as written ones and thus found in favor of Morgan, ordering him to pay Reintzel $1,000 for his land according to their original agreement.

In Morgan v. Reintzel, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when it had been made without consideration. The majority of the court held that such contracts were not enforceable because they lacked consideration and thus did not constitute a valid agreement under the law. However, Justice Story dissented from this opinion and argued that there should be an exception for certain types of agreements where one party has already performed their part of the bargain before any dispute arises as to its validity or enforceability. He reasoned that if one party had already acted in reliance on the promise then it would be unjust to allow them to suffer loss due to lack of consideration since they have done all that is required by law for enforcement purposes. Therefore, he concluded that these kinds of contracts should still be considered binding even though no actual legal consideration existed at time of formation