The Supreme Court case Baltimore Steamship Company et al. v. Phillips in 1926 revolved around the issue of whether a seaman could bring multiple suits for maintenance and cure, which is a maritime law doctrine that obligates a shipowner to provide medical care free of charge to a seaman injured in the service of the ship, regardless of fault. The plaintiff, Phillips, had been injured while working on one of Baltimore Steamship Company's vessels and had previously sued for damages related to his injury but later brought another suit seeking additional maintenance and cure benefits. The defendant argued that this constituted double recovery as he was essentially being sued twice for the same incident. However, Justice McReynolds delivered an opinion stating that each day creates a new obligation on part of the ship owner towards its crew members' health under general maritime law; hence it does not constitute double recovery or splitting causes into different actions. Therefore, even if there has been judgment rendered either way in previous action regarding certain period’s claim (maintenance & cure), it doesn’t affect subsequent claims pertaining to periods falling after prior judgement.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Baltimore Steamship Company et al. v. Phillips argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and misinterpreted maritime law principles. The dissent contended that a seaman should not be denied recovery for injuries sustained due to negligence, even if he had previously received maintenance and cure benefits from his employer. It emphasized that these two forms of compensation serve different purposes: maintenance and cure are meant to provide immediate relief after an injury, while damages for negligence compensate for long-term harm or loss caused by another party's fault. Therefore, receiving one form of compensation should not preclude a seaman from seeking the other. The dissent also expressed concern about potential negative impacts on maritime workers' rights resulting from this ruling.