The case of National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers et al. v. Wood, Administrator in 1936 revolved around the issue of whether a federal agency could be sued without congressional approval. The plaintiff was an administrator of a deceased veteran's estate who sought to sue the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers (NHDVS) over alleged negligence that resulted in the death of his ward while under their care. NHDVS argued they were immune from lawsuits as they were part of the U.S government and Congress had not explicitly given permission for them to be sued. The Supreme Court ruled against NHDVS, stating that it did not enjoy sovereign immunity because it was not strictly a government entity but rather operated more like a private corporation with its own board and funds separate from those controlled by Congress or any other governmental department. Thus, it could indeed be held liable just like any other private organization if found negligent.

In the dissenting opinion for National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers et al. v. Wood, Administrator, Justice Cardozo disagreed with the majority's decision that a federal agency could be sued without congressional consent. He argued that this ruling contradicted established legal principles and previous court decisions which held that sovereign immunity protected government agencies from lawsuits unless Congress explicitly waived this protection. Furthermore, he contended that allowing such suits would open up federal agencies to an overwhelming number of potential claims and disrupt their operations by forcing them to spend time and resources defending against these actions rather than focusing on their public duties. Therefore, he believed it was necessary for Congress to make clear when it intended to waive sovereign immunity in order not only to protect governmental functions but also ensure fairness towards those who might have legitimate claims against these entities.