In Koller et al. v. United States (1958), the appellants, who were members of a labor union, were convicted for violating the Taft-Hartley Act by coercing and intimidating employees in their right to refrain from assisting a labor organization. The Supreme Court upheld these convictions on appeal, rejecting arguments that there was insufficient evidence to support them and that the trial court erred in its instructions to the jury about what constituted coercion or intimidation under federal law. The Court found that there was ample evidence showing that threats had been made against non-striking workers during a strike organized by appellants' union, which could reasonably be interpreted as coercive or intimidating behavior prohibited by the Taft-Hartley Act.

In the dissenting opinion for Koller et al. v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold convictions under a statute prohibiting "false statements" about financial conditions of banks failed to consider whether such statements were made with fraudulent intent or not. The dissenting justices believed that this interpretation could potentially criminalize innocent mistakes and honest differences in judgment regarding complex financial matters, which would be an overly broad application of the law. They also pointed out inconsistencies in how similar statutes had been interpreted by different courts across various jurisdictions, arguing for a more uniform approach based on legislative intent rather than literal readings of statutory language. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view that defendants' knowledge about their false statements was irrelevant; instead asserting that knowing falsehoods should be considered as part of determining guilt or innocence under this particular statute.