In the case of Gonsalves v. Morse Dry Dock & Repair Company, 1924, a worker named Manuel Gonsalves was injured while working on a ship owned by the Morse Dry Dock and Repair Company. The injury occurred when he fell from an elevated platform that lacked safety railings. He sued for damages under New York state law which required such protections for workers in high places. However, the company argued that since they were engaged in maritime activities at the time of his accident, federal maritime law should apply instead - this would exempt them from liability as it did not require safety railings. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gonsalves stating that although federal laws generally govern accidents occurring on navigable waters (maritime jurisdiction), there are exceptions where state laws can be applied if they do not interfere with uniformity of maritime law across states or impede free flow of interstate commerce. In this case, applying New York's labor protection statute to provide compensation to Mr.Gonsalves did not conflict with any fundamental feature of maritime law nor obstruct national commercial interests; hence it could be enforced despite being a local regulation.

In the dissenting opinion for Gonsalves v. Morse Dry Dock & Repair Company, Justice Holmes argued that the plaintiff should not be denied compensation due to his inability to speak English. He believed that it was unjust and discriminatory to deny a worker's claim because he could not understand warnings given in a language foreign to him. The justice emphasized that employers have an obligation under law and morality to ensure their employees' safety regardless of linguistic barriers, which includes providing instructions or warnings in a language they can comprehend. In this case, since the employer failed its duty by giving safety instructions only in English knowing well about workers who couldn't understand them, it should bear responsibility for any resulting harm or injury.