In Hyde and Schneider v. United States, the defendants were charged with conspiracy to defraud the government by submitting false claims for payment of liquor taxes. The Supreme Court ruled that a conspiracy could be prosecuted even if its objective was not achieved, thus upholding their convictions. The court also held that each conspirator need not know all details or participants in the scheme; it is enough if they understand the general nature of the plan and agree to it. Furthermore, an overt act by one conspirator can implicate all others involved in furtherance of their common design.

In the dissenting opinion for Hyde and Schneider v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the defendants were not given a fair trial due to multiple errors made by the court during proceedings. He believed that it was wrong for the jury to be instructed they could find all defendants guilty of conspiracy if they found any one of them guilty, as this did not allow each defendant's case to be considered individually on its own merits. Furthermore, he disagreed with how evidence from other unrelated cases was allowed into testimony which may have unfairly influenced the jury against certain defendants who had no involvement in those cases. Lastly, he criticized how some witnesses were permitted to give hearsay evidence without being cross-examined or their credibility assessed properly by defense attorneys. Overall, Justice Harlan felt these issues combined denied Hyde and Schneider their constitutional right to a fair trial.