In the case of James Knight, James H. West and Robert Sargeant v. Augustus Schell, the plaintiffs in error brought a suit against Schell for damages caused by his negligence while operating a steamboat on the Mississippi River. The court found that although there was no contract between them, they were entitled to recover damages from Schell because he had acted negligently and carelessly in running his boat into their vessel without warning or proper lookout. Furthermore, it was determined that even though both vessels were moving at the time of collision due to circumstances beyond either party's control (i.e., strong winds), this did not absolve Schell from liability as he still should have taken greater precautions when navigating such dangerous waters with other boats present nearby. As such, judgment was rendered for the plaintiffs and they were awarded compensation for their losses incurred as a result of Schell’s negligent actions

In the case of James Knight, James H. West, and Robert Sargeant v. Augustus Schell, the dissenting opinion argued that a contract between two parties should be enforced according to its terms unless it is contrary to public policy or illegal in some way. The majority had held that an agreement between the plaintiffs and defendant was void because it violated a statute prohibiting contracts for personal services beyond one year without special permission from Congress; however, this did not apply as there were no such restrictions on contracts involving labor performed outside of Washington D.C., where this particular contract was made. The dissenters argued that since there were no legal impediments preventing enforcement of the contract at issue here, then it should have been upheld by the court regardless of any statutory prohibitions against long-term service agreements within Washington D.C.. Furthermore they noted that if courts are allowed to invalidate contracts based solely on their own interpretation of statutes which do not explicitly prohibit them then all contractual obligations would become uncertain and unreliable - something which could potentially lead to chaos in commercial transactions across America's judicial system