In the case of William B. Grant, et al v Cornelius Poillon, et al., libellants and appellants (William B. Grant, William Bradstreet, William L. Flitner, Peter Grant in his own right and as administrator of Thomas Grant deceased; Elizabeth F. Grant administratrix; William S.Grant and George Bacon administrators of the estate of Samuel C.Grant deceased) owned the American Ship Constellation while respondents and appellees (Cornelius Poillon Richard Poillon James L Varick impleaded with H Johnson Hicks Bailey William Y Clark Dean W W Hinchen CH Clark D D Miller) were found to be liable for damages due to a collision between their vessel and that belonging to the libellants/appellants which resulted in significant damage being done to both vessels at sea during an 1857 voyage from New York City bound for Liverpool England . The Supreme Court ruled that all parties involved should bear responsibility for any losses incurred by either side due to this incident according to maritime law principles established by Congress at that time

In the case of William B. Grant et al v Cornelius Poillon et al, the dissenting opinion argued that a maritime lien was created when goods were delivered to a vessel for its use and benefit, even if those goods had not been paid for yet. The majority opinion disagreed with this argument and held that no such lien existed until payment had been made in full or security given for it. The dissenters believed this decision would be detrimental to merchants who supplied vessels with necessary supplies on credit, as they could now be left without any recourse should their customers fail to pay them back. They also felt that allowing creditors an opportunity to secure payment through liens would encourage more people to provide ships with essential items on credit which would ultimately benefit commerce by providing greater access to resources at sea.