In the 1898 case of Mullen v. Western Union Beef Company, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract for the sale and delivery of cattle could be considered valid if it did not specify an exact quantity. The plaintiff, Mullen, had entered into a contract with Western Union Beef Company to supply them with all their required beef cattle over a certain period. However, no specific quantity was mentioned in the agreement. When disagreements arose regarding payment and delivery quantities, Mullen sued for breach of contract but lost at both district court level and on appeal due to lack of specificity in terms of quantity within the original agreement. The Supreme Court reversed these decisions stating that while contracts typically require specified quantities to be enforceable under common law principles; exceptions can exist when exclusivity is implied or stated outright as part of an ongoing business relationship between parties involved in trade or commerce - such as this one between Mullen and Western Union Beef Company.

In the dissenting opinion for Mullen v. Western Union Beef Company, it was argued that the court majority had erred in its interpretation of the law and application to this case. The dissent maintained that there was no legal basis for holding a corporation liable for damages caused by an employee's negligence when performing duties outside his scope of employment. They contended that corporations should only be held responsible if they directly authorized or participated in wrongful acts committed by their employees, not merely because they employed them. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view on proximate cause; arguing instead that even if an employee’s actions were negligent and resulted in injury, liability should not automatically fall upon employers unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that such negligence was within the course of employment or under direct orders from superiors.