In the 1908 case of Kreigh v. Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Company, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over patent rights. The plaintiff, William H. Kreigh was an inventor who had assigned his patents to Westinghouse Air Brake Company and later claimed that he had been inadequately compensated for them by the company's successor in interest - Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Co., Inc. He sought to recover damages on grounds of fraud and breach of contract. The court ruled against Kreigh stating that there were no legal grounds for him to claim additional compensation beyond what was agreed upon in their original agreement when he sold his patents outright without any reservation or condition about future use or profits from these inventions. Furthermore, it held that even if there were such conditions they would be void as being contrary to public policy which encourages free competition and discourages restrictions on trade. This decision reinforced principles related to patent law including respect for contractual agreements between parties regarding sale/transfer of patent rights and non-interference by courts unless evidence shows clear violation or abuse.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kreigh v. Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Company argued that the majority's decision to dismiss the case was incorrect. The dissent believed that there were sufficient grounds for a lawsuit because Westinghouse had allegedly breached its contract with Kreigh by failing to provide him with certain benefits and privileges as promised under their agreement. This breach of contract, according to the dissenters, caused significant financial harm and distress to Mr. Kreigh who relied on these benefits for his livelihood and well-being. They contended that it was not fair or just for Westinghouse to escape liability simply because they claimed no knowledge of any wrongdoing or misconduct on their part when evidence suggested otherwise.