In the case of Eastern Transportation Company v. United States et al., 1926, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government. The dispute arose from a collision between two vessels - one owned by Eastern Transportation Company and another by the United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation. The former claimed that it was not at fault for this accident and therefore should not be held liable for damages to both ships or any resulting losses. However, after examining evidence presented during trial proceedings, including testimonies from crew members on both vessels involved in this incident as well as expert witnesses who provided their professional opinion about what likely caused this collision based on available facts, justices concluded that negligence on part of Eastern Transportation Company's employees contributed significantly to occurrence of this unfortunate event. Therefore they upheld lower court's decision which found them responsible for covering all costs associated with repairing damaged property and compensating affected parties accordingly.

In the dissenting opinion for Eastern Transportation Company v. United States, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's ruling that a ship owner could be held liable for damages caused by an incompetent crew member who was hired without proper investigation into his qualifications. He argued that this interpretation of maritime law would place an undue burden on ship owners and potentially disrupt commerce. According to Justice McReynolds, it is unreasonable to expect employers to conduct thorough investigations into every potential employee's past performance and competence levels before hiring them. Instead, he suggested that liability should only apply in cases where negligence or incompetence were clearly evident at the time of hiring.