In the case of Alaska Steamship Co. v. United States in 1933, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a ship owner could not claim compensation for damages caused by a collision with an unmarked wreck if it was already known to navigators at the time of the accident. The steamship company had sought reparations from the federal government after one of its vessels collided with an underwater obstruction near Kodiak Island, Alaska, which turned out to be a sunken shipwreck that had been there for several years and was well-known among local mariners. However, because this wreck wasn't marked on any official charts or otherwise indicated by maritime authorities as being hazardous to navigation, they argued that they were entitled to recover their losses under provisions of federal law intended to protect shipping interests against such unforeseen dangers. But in denying their claim unanimously (9-0), Justice Benjamin Cardozo wrote for the court majority stating "knowledge is equivalent to notice," meaning since area's sailors knew about it then so should have Alaska Steamship Company.

In the dissenting opinion for Alaska Steamship Co. v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on shipping companies operating in Alaskan waters was incorrect and unfair. The dissenting justices believed that this tax constituted an undue burden on interstate commerce, which is protected under the Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution. They contended that while Congress has broad powers to regulate commerce among states, these powers should not be used as a means of imposing discriminatory or excessive taxes on certain types of businesses or industries. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative impacts on economic development and competition within the shipping industry due to such taxation policies.