In the case of United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. United States, for the use and benefit, etc., of The Golden Pressed and Fire Brick Co., 1903, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a surety company could be held liable for debts incurred by a contractor under contract with the federal government. The contractor had failed to pay its supplier (The Golden Pressed and Fire Brick Company), which then sought payment from both the contractor's surety bond provider (United States Fidelity & Guaranty) as well as directly from funds owed to the contractor by the U.S Government under their contract agreement. The court ruled in favor of Golden Pressed and Fire Brick Company stating that when a bond is given to secure performance of a construction contract with provisions requiring payment for labor/materials used in execution thereof, it covers all such materials ordered specifically for said work even if not incorporated into it or returned unused.

In the dissenting opinion for the United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. United States case, it was argued that a surety company should not be held liable for payment of materials used in construction work beyond what is specified in the original contract. The justice believed that if there were any additional costs incurred due to changes or additions to the project, these should fall on the contractor who agreed to them without consulting with or getting consent from their guarantor first. They maintained that a bond's purpose is only to ensure fulfillment of specific contractual obligations as they are stated at signing, not unforeseen expenses arising later on during execution of said contract.