In Ryan et al. v. Carter et al., the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable. The contract in question was between the plaintiffs, Ryan et al., and the defendants, Carter et al. The plaintiffs had agreed to pay the defendants a certain sum of money in exchange for the defendants' promise to convey certain real estate to the plaintiffs. The defendants had failed to fulfill their promise, and the plaintiffs sought to recover the money they had paid. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court noted that the contract was clear and unambiguous, and that the parties had agreed to its terms. The Court also noted that the plaintiffs had performed their part of the contract, and that the defendants had failed to fulfill their promise. As a result, the Court held that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover the money they had paid.

In Ryan et al. v. Carter et al., the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract between two parties could be enforced despite one of the parties having died before it was fully executed. The majority opinion held that, since the contract had been partially performed and accepted by both sides, it should still be enforceable in court even though one party had passed away prior to its completion. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that contracts are personal agreements between individuals and cannot survive beyond their deaths unless they have specifically provided for such an outcome in writing beforehand. He argued that allowing a deceased person's estate to fulfill contractual obligations would create confusion as to who is responsible for fulfilling them and how much money or property must be exchanged as part of those obligations; thus, he concluded that any agreement not explicitly providing for post-death enforcement should not be allowed under law.