New Orleans v. Louisiana Construction Company was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 1891. The case involved a dispute between the City of New Orleans and the Louisiana Construction Company over the construction of a levee. The City of New Orleans had contracted with the Louisiana Construction Company to build a levee along the Mississippi River. The Louisiana Construction Company had completed the work, but the City of New Orleans refused to pay the full amount due to the company. The Louisiana Construction Company then sued the City of New Orleans for breach of contract. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the Louisiana Construction Company. The Court held that the City of New Orleans had breached its contract with the Louisiana Construction Company and was liable for the full amount due. The Court also held that the City of New Orleans was not entitled to any damages for the delay in the completion of the levee. This decision established the principle that a party to a contract is liable for the full amount due, regardless of any delays or other issues that may arise.

In the dissenting opinion for New Orleans v. Louisiana Construction Company, Justice Holmes argued that the majority's decision was too broad and should be limited to its facts. He believed that the court had gone beyond what it needed to decide in order to resolve this case and instead created a new rule of law which could have far-reaching implications on other cases. Furthermore, he noted that there were several issues left unresolved by the majority's ruling such as whether or not an implied warranty existed between parties when no express contract was made. Ultimately, Justice Holmes felt that while he agreed with some aspects of the majority opinion, their overall conclusion went too far and would create unnecessary confusion in future cases involving similar circumstances.