The U.S. Supreme Court case Lecrone v. McAdoo, Secretary of the Treasury (1919) revolved around a dispute over the seizure and sale of coal by the United States government during World War I under the Lever Act. The Orinoco Company, Limited had contracted to sell coal to a Spanish company but before it could be delivered, it was requisitioned by the U.S government for war purposes. After paying compensation based on market value at time of taking possession rather than contract price which was higher due to wartime inflation, Orinoco's receiver sued for additional compensation arguing that they were entitled to receive payment based on their contract price with Spanish company as per Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause which prohibits government from taking private property without just compensation. However, in its decision, Supreme Court held that "just" compensation required only payment equal to fair market value at time of seizure not what might have been earned under an existing contract and hence ruled against Orinoco Company.

In the dissenting opinion for Lecrone v. McAdoo, it was argued that the Secretary of Treasury did not have the authority to seize assets from a company under investigation without due process. The dissenting justices believed that this action violated constitutional rights and protections against unlawful search and seizure as well as due process rights. They contended that while there may be suspicion or evidence of wrongdoing on part of a corporation, such actions should only be taken after proper legal proceedings have been conducted and guilt has been established beyond reasonable doubt in court. This would ensure fairness and justice are upheld in accordance with principles enshrined within American law.