In the case of A.W. Duckett & Company, Inc. v. United States (1924), the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the U.S government over a dispute regarding war risk insurance policies during World War I. The plaintiff, A.W Duckett & Co., claimed that they were entitled to compensation for losses incurred when their ship was destroyed by an enemy submarine while it was moored and unloading cargo at a French port in 1917. However, the defendant - United States Government argued that under terms of war risk insurance policy issued by them, coverage did not extend to vessels "in port". The court held that since the vessel was within a harbor but not docked or anchored at time of its destruction, it could be considered as being 'at sea' rather than 'in port'. Therefore, according to this interpretation of policy terms and conditions set forth by government's War Risk Insurance Bureau; loss suffered due to such incidents would be covered under respective policies.

In the dissenting opinion for A.W. Duckett & Company, Inc. v. United States, the justice argued that the majority's interpretation of Section 10(b) of the Lever Act was incorrect and overly broad. The justice believed that this section should not be applied to cases where a seller has made an honest mistake in their pricing or has been misled by market conditions into charging too much for their goods or services. Instead, they felt it should only apply when there is clear evidence of intentional profiteering at consumers' expense during times of war or national emergency - something which they did not believe had been proven in this case against A.W Duckett & Company, Inc., who were accused of overcharging on contracts with government agencies during World War I.