In the case of North Pacific Steamship Company v. Hall Brothers Marine Railway & Shipbuilding Company, 1918, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract for ship repairs could be considered maritime in nature and thus fall under federal jurisdiction. The North Pacific Steamship Co., after having its vessel repaired by Hall Bros., refused to pay on grounds that the repair company had not properly performed their work. In response, Hall Bros filed a lien against the ship in Washington state court which ruled in favor of them. On appeal however, it was argued that this matter fell within admiralty law (federal) rather than state law due to its maritime nature. The Supreme Court held that while contracts for ship repairs are indeed maritime contracts as they pertain to navigation and commerce over navigable waters; such contracts do not necessarily have exclusive rights under federal jurisdiction if they can also be enforced through common-law remedies at a state level without disturbing harmonious operation of federal maritime law system. Therefore, it affirmed lower courts' decisions allowing states to enforce liens arising from these types of contractual disputes.

In the dissenting opinion for North Pacific Steamship Company v. Hall Brothers Marine Railway & Shipbuilding Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold the ship owner liable for damages caused by a latent defect in its vessel was unjustified. The dissenting justices believed that there should be no liability unless negligence could be proven on part of the ship owner. They contended that if a vessel is sent out in good faith and with no knowledge of any defects, then an accident resulting from such unknown defects should not result in penalties against the owners. This view emphasizes strict adherence to principles of fault-based liability rather than imposing absolute or strict liability regardless of fault or intent.