In the case of Davison Bros. Marble Company v. United States on the Relation of Gibson, 1908, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gibson who had filed a lawsuit against Davison Brothers Marble Company for failing to fulfill their contract obligations with him. The company was contracted by Gibson to provide marble for a federal building project but failed to deliver as agreed upon in their contract terms. As such, they were sued under the False Claims Act which allows individuals (relators) to file actions on behalf of the government if they believe that it has been defrauded. The court held that even though there was no direct loss incurred by the government due to this breach, since it did not pay any money out because of defendant's false claim or fraudulent conduct; yet an action could be maintained under said act because its purpose is not only recovery but also punishment and deterrence from future frauds against public treasury.

In the dissenting opinion for Davison Bros. Marble Company v. United States on the Relation of Gibson, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling against Davison Bros. Marble Company was incorrect because it failed to properly consider key aspects of contract law and interpretation. The dissenting justices believed that there were ambiguities in the original contract between Davison Bros and Gibson which should have been resolved in favor of Davison Bros., as they had acted in good faith based on their understanding of its terms at the time they entered into it with Gibson. They also disagreed with how damages were calculated by both courts, arguing that these did not accurately reflect actual losses suffered by either party due to alleged breaches of this contract.