In the case of Michael A. Haddle v. Jeanette G. Garrison, et al., 1998, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of an employee who claimed he was fired for cooperating with a federal investigation into his employer's fraudulent activities against Medicare and Medicaid programs. The court held that Haddle had standing to sue under Section 1985(2) of Title 42 which prohibits conspiracies to interfere with justice system proceedings because it covers not only instances where individuals are harmed in their person or property but also when they are deprived of having and continuing contractual relationships without fear of unjust punishment. Haddle alleged that after testifying before a grand jury about his employer’s fraud, he was terminated from his job at another company due to pressure from defendants involved in the original lawsuit - thus constituting conspiracy as defined by law. The lower courts initially dismissed Haddle's claim stating that since 'at-will' employees can be terminated anytime, there were no rights violated here; however, this decision was overturned by the Supreme Court emphasizing on protection against conspiratorial actions interfering with judicial processes.

In the dissenting opinion for Haddle v. Garrison, Justice Thomas argued that the majority's decision to allow a claim of conspiracy under 42 U.S.C §1985(2) in cases where there is no actual loss of employment or property rights was incorrect. He asserted that this interpretation broadened the scope of §1985(2) beyond its original intent and could potentially lead to an influx of frivolous lawsuits. Furthermore, he contended that Haddle did not suffer any injury as required by Article III because his at-will employment status meant he had no legal entitlement to continued employment with Healthmaster Inc., thus making him ineligible for damages under §1985(2). Therefore, according to Justice Thomas' view, Haddle’s case should have been dismissed due to lack of standing.