In the case of William H. Phillips v. George Page, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced in court if it had been made without consideration and with no intention of being legally binding. The plaintiff argued that he had entered into an agreement with the defendant for certain services, but that there was no consideration given or received by either party at the time they agreed upon their arrangement. The defendant countered that even though there was no consideration involved, his promise should still be enforceable because both parties intended to enter into a legal relationship when they made their agreement. After considering all arguments presented by both sides, the Supreme Court ultimately ruled against enforcing any such contracts without consideration as this would undermine public policy and encourage fraudulence in business transactions.

In the case of William H. Phillips v George Page, Justice Grier delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority had erred by failing to consider whether or not an implied contract existed between the parties. He noted that while there was no express agreement between them, it could be inferred from their actions and words that they did intend to enter into some kind of contractual relationship. Furthermore, he argued that even if such an agreement were found to exist, it would still be necessary for both parties to prove its terms and conditions before any damages could be awarded. In conclusion, Justice Grier believed that this case should have been remanded back to the lower court so as to allow for further examination of these issues before a final judgment was made on either side's behalf.