In the case of Barker Painting Company v. Local No. 734, Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators, and Paperhangers of America et al., the Supreme Court examined whether a labor union could be held liable for damages caused by striking workers. The Barker Painting Company had sued the local chapter of the Brotherhood after a strike led to significant financial losses for their business. However, in its ruling, the court found that unions were not responsible for individual actions taken by members during strikes unless it could be proven that those actions were directly ordered or endorsed by union leadership. This decision was significant as it helped define limits on union liability and provided some protection against potentially crippling damage claims related to strike activities.

In the dissenting opinion for Barker Painting Company v. Local No. 734, Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators, and Paperhangers of America et al., Justice Stone argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings on labor disputes and collective bargaining rights. He contended that a union's peaceful efforts to persuade customers not to patronize a business until it complied with their demands should be protected under federal law as legitimate means of economic pressure in labor disputes. According to him, such actions did not constitute unlawful coercion or intimidation but were part of the process by which workers could assert their rights and negotiate better conditions from employers. Furthermore, he believed that state courts should have jurisdiction over these matters rather than federal courts because they involved local trade disputes rather than interstate commerce issues.