In The United States vs. Thomas Tingey's Administrators, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced after one of them had died. Thomas Tingey had entered into an agreement with the United States government in which he agreed to sell land and buildings located on Navy Yard property for $5,000. After his death, his administrators sought to enforce the contract against the government but were denied by lower courts due to lack of consideration from both sides. In its decision, the Supreme Court held that contracts are binding even if they are not fully executed at time of death and can still be enforced by executors or administrators as long as there is sufficient evidence that it was intended to bind both parties during their lifetime. This ruling established precedent for future cases involving contractual obligations after death and affirmed that executors have standing in court when seeking enforcement of such agreements.

In the United States vs. Thomas Tingey's Administrators, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the Court should not have granted an appeal to the executors of Tingey’s estate. He believed that since there was no dispute between parties over any facts or law, and both sides agreed on all points, it would be inappropriate for the court to intervene in this case. Furthermore, Marshall argued that if they did grant an appeal then it could set a precedent where appeals were allowed even when there was no disagreement between parties and thus lead to unnecessary delays in resolving cases. In conclusion, Chief Justice Marshall felt strongly against granting an appeal as he believed it would create more problems than solutions by allowing appeals without any factual or legal disputes present.