Louisa Hamer, the plaintiff, brought suit against Franklin Sidway, the executor of the estate of William E. Story I, the defendant, for the sum of $5,000.

Story I also stated that he preferred to wait until his nephew was older before actually handing over the extremely large sum of money.

The elder Story's estate refused to grant Hamer the money and believed there was no binding contract since there was a lack of consideration.

Judge Alton Parker (later Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals), writing for a unanimous court, wrote that the forbearance of legal rights by Story II, namely the consensual abstinence from "drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money until he should become 21 years of age" constituted consideration in exchange for the promise given by Story I.

The executor of Story I's estate, Sidway, was therefore legally bound to deliver the promised $5,000 to whoever currently held the interest in the sum, which by the time of the trial was Hamer.