Otis v. Walter was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1817. The dispute arose when Otis, an administrator of his deceased brother's estate, sued Walter for failing to pay a debt that had been owed to the estate prior to its owner's death. The court found in favor of Otis and held that even though the debtor had died before payment could be made, it did not absolve him from responsibility for paying off his debts; instead, they were inherited by his heirs or administrators as part of their inheritance rights under English common law. This decision established precedent which has since been used in cases involving similar issues regarding debt collection after death.

In Otis v. Walter, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a state statute which authorized an executor to sell real estate belonging to his deceased testator was unconstitutional as it violated Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution. The majority opinion found that this statute interfered with vested rights and thus could not be enforced without violating constitutional principles. Justice Story dissented from this decision on two grounds: first, he argued that there was no evidence in either case law or legislative history indicating any intention by Congress to limit such statutes; second, he argued that even if such a limitation existed it would only apply when property is taken for public use and not when sold pursuant to private contracts between individuals. He concluded by stating "I am therefore constrained reluctantly but firmly to dissent from the judgment pronounced."