The case of Hurley v. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company in 1908 revolved around a dispute over the payment for coal delivered by Mount Carmel Coal Company to the railway company. After delivering the coal, Mount Carmel went bankrupt before receiving full payment from Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Co., leaving its trustee (Hurley) to recover any outstanding debts owed to it. However, there was disagreement about whether or not the railway company had already paid for all of its received shipments in full. The Supreme Court ruled that under bankruptcy law at that time, if a debtor has made payments within four months prior to their creditor's bankruptcy filing with reasonable cause to believe they were insolvent - as was argued by Hurley regarding AT&SF's payments - those funds could be recovered back into the bankrupt estate unless "such person" can prove they acted in good faith without knowledge of insolvency when making said payments.

In the dissenting opinion for Hurley v. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to allow a railway company to claim priority over other creditors in bankruptcy proceedings contradicted established legal principles. It was contended that this ruling unfairly favored corporations with significant economic power at the expense of smaller businesses and individual creditors. The dissent also criticized the court's interpretation of relevant statutes, arguing that they did not intend to give such preferential treatment to railroad companies or any other specific type of creditor. Furthermore, it was suggested that allowing such preferences could undermine public confidence in the fairness and impartiality of bankruptcy proceedings.