The Troy Iron and Nail Factory (Appellant) appealed a decision of the New York Supreme Court to the United States Supreme Court. The Appellant argued that Erastus Corning, John F. Winslow, and James Horner (Respondents) had wrongfully taken possession of their property without due process or legal authority. The Respondents claimed they were acting on behalf of creditors who held liens against the Appellant's property for unpaid debts owed by them. The US Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Respondents, finding that they acted within their rights as creditors to take possession of the Appellants' property until payment was made for outstanding debt obligations. This ruling established an important precedent regarding creditor-debtor relationships under common law in which creditors are allowed to seize assets from debtors when payments are not met according to contractual agreements between parties involved in such transactions.

In the Troy Iron and Nail Factory v. Erastus Corning, John F. Winslow, and James Horner case, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when it had been made without consideration or any other form of legal obligation. The majority opinion held that such contracts were not enforceable because they lacked consideration; however, Justice McLean dissented from this ruling on the grounds that there should be an exception for cases in which one party has already performed their part of the agreement before learning that no consideration existed. He argued that if one party had acted in good faith by performing their obligations under an agreement even though it lacked consideration then justice would require them to receive some recompense for doing so. Therefore he concluded that courts should have discretion to recognize such agreements as valid contracts where appropriate circumstances exist and grant relief accordingly.