In Alanson Saltmarsh v. James W. Tuthill, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to determine whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when one party had not received any consideration for their part in it. The plaintiff, Alanson Saltmarsh, argued that he had entered into an agreement with defendant James W. Tuthill whereby he would pay $500 for certain lands owned by Tuthill and receive title to them upon payment of said sum; however, no money ever changed hands and thus there was no consideration given on either side of the transaction. The court ultimately held that since both parties were aware at the time they made this agreement that no money would be exchanged as part of it, then neither party could enforce its terms against each other because there was nothing binding them together legally or otherwise - i.e., without some form of consideration being present in order to make a valid contract under law then neither party can expect anything from each other based solely on what they agreed upon verbally or through written documents alone

In Alanson Saltmarsh v. James W. Tuthill, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when it had been made without consideration and in violation of an existing statute. The majority opinion held that the contract was not enforceable because it lacked consideration and violated a law prohibiting such contracts from being formed in certain circumstances; however, Justice Grier dissented on this point. He argued that although there may have been no legal consideration for the agreement, there were still moral considerations which should be taken into account when deciding if a contract is valid or not. Furthermore, he believed that since both parties had acted in good faith with regards to their obligations under the agreement, they should both be bound by its terms regardless of any statutory prohibitions against such agreements being formed at all.