In Scott, Assignee v. Kelly, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties was valid and enforceable. The plaintiff, Scott, was the assignee of a contract between the defendant, Kelly, and a third party. The contract was for the sale of a parcel of land. Kelly argued that the contract was invalid because it had not been properly executed. The Supreme Court held that the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court found that the contract was properly executed and that the parties had agreed to its terms. The Court also held that the assignee had the right to enforce the contract and that Kelly was bound by its terms. The Court concluded that the contract was valid and enforceable and that Scott was entitled to recover the purchase price of the land.

In Scott, Assignee v. Kelly, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a judgment creditor of an insolvent debtor could recover from a third party who had received payment for goods sold to the debtor prior to his insolvency. The majority held that such recovery was not allowed under existing law and denied relief to the assignee. However, Justice Field dissented on this ruling and argued that it would be unjust if creditors were unable to recover payments made by their debtors before they became insolvent due to no fault of their own. He noted that in cases where there is fraud or collusion between the parties involved in making such payments, then those should not be protected; however he believed that when there is no evidence of any wrongdoing or bad faith on either side then justice requires allowing recovery from innocent third-party recipients of funds paid out by an insolvent debtor prior to his bankruptcy proceedings commencing.