The Supreme Court case "In the Matter of 620 Church Street Building Corp. et al." in 1936 revolved around bankruptcy proceedings and the rights of secured creditors. The building corporation had filed for bankruptcy, and its largest creditor was a bank that held a mortgage on the property. The court considered whether this creditor could assert its claim against rents collected from tenants during receivership before other unsecured creditors were paid off. In an important decision, the Supreme Court ruled that under Section 77B of the Bankruptcy Act, secured creditors such as banks have priority over unsecured ones when it comes to rental income generated by properties in receivership during bankruptcy proceedings.

The dissenting opinion in the case of 620 Church Street Building Corp. et al., argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law allowing for the reorganization of insolvent corporations without unanimous consent from all shareholders was unconstitutional. The dissenting justices believed this violated both contract and due process rights, as it allowed for changes to be made against a shareholder's will, potentially resulting in significant financial loss. They contended that such laws should not be used as tools by majorities to force minorities into accepting terms they do not agree with or find unfavorable. Furthermore, they expressed concern over how these types of laws could lead to potential abuses by those in power at the expense of minority shareholders' interests and rights.