In the case of Belknap, Inc. v. Hale et al., 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute arising from a labor strike at Belknap Inc., a hardware wholesaler in Kentucky. The company had hired replacement workers during the strike and promised them permanent employment contracts to entice them to cross picket lines. However, when an agreement was reached with the union and striking employees returned to work, these replacements were dismissed by Belknap who claimed that they were only temporary hires despite their contracts stating otherwise. The discharged workers sued for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the replacement workers on both counts - breach of contract as well as fraudulent misrepresentation - holding that federal labor law did not preempt state common-law claims brought by nonunion employees against an employer based on promises made during hiring negotiations.

In the dissenting opinion for Belknap, Inc. v. Hale et al., Justice Blackmun argued that the majority's decision to allow a company to sue striking workers for damages was fundamentally unfair and contradicted established labor law principles. He contended that allowing such lawsuits would discourage strikes by making them too risky financially for workers, thus undermining their right to collective action as protected under federal labor laws. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of common-law fraud principles in this context and believed they were misapplied in this case because there was no evidence of deceit or dishonesty on part of the strikers when they returned to work under new identities after being permanently replaced during a strike.