In the case of Renner & Bussard v. Marshall, two individuals sued a third individual for damages resulting from an alleged breach of contract. The plaintiffs argued that they had entered into a verbal agreement with the defendant to purchase land in Kentucky and pay him $1,000 for it. They claimed that he had failed to fulfill his part of the bargain by not delivering them clear title to the property as promised. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendants on grounds that there was no written evidence proving their claim and thus could not be enforced under existing law at that time which required all contracts involving real estate must be made in writing and signed by both parties involved. This decision established precedent requiring all future agreements regarding real estate transactions must be put into writing before being legally binding upon both parties involved.

In Renner & Bussard v. Marshall, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties should be enforced when one of them had died before it could be completed. The majority opinion held that the contract should not be enforced because it had not been fully executed by both parties and thus did not meet all legal requirements for enforceability. However, in his dissenting opinion Justice Story argued that there were sufficient facts present to support enforcement of the agreement despite its incomplete execution due to death of one party. He reasoned that since both parties had already performed some part of their obligations under the contract prior to either's death, they must have intended for those actions to bind them legally even if full performance was never achieved. Therefore he concluded that equity demanded recognition and enforcement of this agreement as validly binding on both sides despite its incompleteness at time of death