In the case of First National Bank of Princeton, Illinois v. Littlefield, Trustee (1912), the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether a bank could recover money it had mistakenly paid to a trustee in bankruptcy. The bank had received two checks from an insolvent customer and credited them to his account before discovering that they were drawn on insufficient funds. By this time, however, the bank had already sent part of these funds to Littlefield as payment for one of its customer's debts under bankruptcy proceedings. When the error was discovered, the bank sought reimbursement from Littlefield but he refused arguing that he accepted those payments in good faith without knowledge of any mistake or insolvency issues at hand. The court ruled against First National Bank stating that since there wasn't any fraud involved and considering that both parties acted in good faith during their transactions; thus making it unfair for Mr.Littlefield who has no prior knowledge about such errors to bear losses due to mistakes made by others.

The dissenting opinion in the case of First National Bank of Princeton, Illinois v. Littlefield, Trustee argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and legal principles regarding bankruptcy law. The dissent felt that a debtor should not be allowed to prefer one creditor over another by transferring assets before declaring bankruptcy. They believed this undermined the principle of equal distribution among creditors in bankruptcy cases and could potentially encourage fraudulent behavior by debtors seeking to protect certain creditors at others' expense. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "transfer" under Section 60a of the Bankruptcy Act as it applied to checks issued but not cashed until after filing for bankruptcy; arguing instead that transfer occurred when payment was made rather than when check was delivered or accepted.