In the 1914 case of Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Vosburg, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company. The dispute arose when Mr. Vosburg sued for damages after a train accident caused by negligence on part of an employee at Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company resulted in his injury and subsequent disability to work as a farmer or laborer. However, it was found that he had been working as a carpenter before and after the accident which contradicted his claim about being unable to work due to injuries sustained from the incident. Therefore, despite acknowledging that there was indeed negligence on part of its employee leading to Mr.Vosburg's injury,the court held that since he misrepresented facts regarding his ability to earn post-accident,it could not award him any compensation for loss of future earnings.The decision set precedence emphasizing truthfulness in claims made during personal injury lawsuits.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Vosburg argued that the majority's decision was based on a misinterpretation of the law and an overreach of judicial power. The dissenters believed that it was not within their jurisdiction to decide whether or not a contract between two private parties was fair or reasonable, as this should be left up to those involved in making the agreement. They also disagreed with the majority's assertion that there were sufficient grounds for declaring such contracts void due to public policy concerns, arguing instead that these issues should be addressed by legislative bodies rather than courts. Furthermore, they contended that if any party felt aggrieved by contractual terms deemed unfair or unreasonable, they had legal recourse through existing laws without needing intervention from higher courts.