This Supreme Court case involved a dispute between the executors of a will and the receiver of the estate. The executors argued that the receiver had no authority to sell certain property of the estate, and that the sale was therefore invalid. The receiver argued that he had the authority to sell the property, and that the sale was valid. The Supreme Court held that the receiver had the authority to sell the property, and that the sale was valid. The Court reasoned that the receiver had the authority to sell the property because the will gave him the power to do so, and that the executors had no authority to interfere with the sale. The Court also held that the executors had no right to challenge the sale, as they had not been given the authority to do so by the will. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the receiver had the authority to sell the property, and that the sale was valid. The executors had no authority to challenge the sale, as they had not been given the authority to do so by the will.

In the case of Whitney and Others, Executors v. Butler, Receiver, a majority opinion was issued by the United States Supreme Court that held that an executor could not be sued in federal court for breach of contract without first obtaining permission from state courts. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision. He argued that since Congress had given federal courts jurisdiction over cases involving contracts made between citizens of different states or foreign countries (known as diversity jurisdiction), it should also have allowed them to hear suits against executors who were involved in such contracts regardless of whether they had obtained permission from state courts or not. Furthermore, he noted that allowing only state courts to decide these matters would lead to unnecessary delays and confusion due to conflicting decisions among multiple jurisdictions. As such, Justice Field concluded that Congress should have granted federal district courts exclusive authority over all cases involving diversity jurisdiction so as to ensure uniformity and efficiency in resolving disputes related thereto