In the case of First National Bank of Claremore v. Keys, 1912, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a bank could be held liable for cashing checks that were fraudulently endorsed. The plaintiff, Mr. Keys had his checks stolen and forged by an unknown party who then successfully cashed them at the defendant's bank (First National Bank). When Mr. Keys discovered this fraudulent activity he sued the bank to recover his losses arguing that they should have known or suspected foul play due to irregularities in signatures on these checks. The court ruled in favor of First National Bank stating it was not their responsibility to verify every signature on each check presented for payment unless there are clear reasons arousing suspicion about its authenticity. They further noted that banks would face impractical burdens if expected to authenticate all signatures beyond reasonable doubt before honoring any transaction which might lead to unnecessary delays and inefficiencies in banking operations. Therefore, while sympathizing with Mr.Keys' predicament, they concluded that liability rested primarily with him as he failed initially to secure his cheques from theft or forgery thus setting off chain events leading up-to loss.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of First National Bank of Claremore v. Keys, it was argued that there were significant errors in judgment by the majority. The dissenting justices believed that Mr. Keys had a right to his property and should not have been forced to pay off debts he did not owe himself but rather those which belonged to his deceased wife's estate. They contended that Mrs. Keys' debt was separate from her husband's assets and therefore, her creditors could only claim against her individual estate after death, not against properties owned jointly with her spouse or solely by him alone as per Oklahoma law at the time. Furthermore, they disagreed with how federal laws were interpreted in this case; arguing instead for an interpretation more consistent with state laws on marital property rights and inheritance issues.