In the Meyer et al. v. United States case of 1960, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving federal income tax law and its application to payments received by an employee upon retirement for unused sick leave. The central issue was whether these payments should be considered as wages subject to taxation or not. The court held that such payments were indeed taxable under Section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code because they constituted gross income derived from labor, even though they were paid after termination of employment. This decision clarified how certain types of post-employment compensation are treated under U.S tax law.

In the dissenting opinion for Meyer et al. v. United States, Justice Whittaker disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold the convictions of defendants under Section 32(a) of the Surplus Property Act of 1944. He argued that this section was not intended by Congress to apply in cases where there is no direct or indirect sale from a government agency involved, as was true in this case. Instead, he believed it should only be applied when someone fraudulently obtains surplus property directly or indirectly from a government agency and then sells it at an inflated price. In his view, interpreting Section 32(a) more broadly would lead to unjust results and could potentially criminalize innocent conduct.