Jeremiah Van Rensselaer, the appellant in this case, was suing Philip Kearney and Frederic De Peyster (the trustees and executors of John Watts) as well as Catherine G. Visscher, Cornelius G. Van Rensselaar, and Glen Van Rensselaer (the defendants). The dispute centered around a contract between Jeremiah's father Stephen van Rennsalaer and John Watts that had been made before his death. According to the agreement, Stephen would give up certain rights to land he owned in exchange for an annuity from Watts' estate after his death; however when Stephen died without receiving any payments from the estate or its trustees/executors it fell upon Jeremiah to take legal action against them on behalf of his late father's interests. Ultimately it was decided by the Supreme Court that since there were no written documents proving either party’s claims regarding their agreement with each other they could not be enforced legally so both parties were denied relief under law.

In the case of Jeremiah Van Rensselaer v. Philip Kearney and Frederic De Peyster, Trustees and Executors of John Watts, deceased, Catherine G. Visscher, Cornelius G. Van Rensselaer, and Glen Van Rensselaer (hereinafter referred to as “the defendants”), the appellant argued that he was entitled to a portion of his father's estate which had been left in trust for him by his grandfather prior to his death. The Supreme Court disagreed with this argument because it found that there were no legal grounds upon which the appellant could make such a claim; instead they held that under New York law at the time only direct descendants or those who stood in loco parentis could be considered heirs-at-law eligible for inheritance from an estate. Since none of these criteria applied to Jeremiah Van Rensselaer he was not legally entitled to any part of his father's estate despite its being placed into trust by his grandfather before passing away.