In the case of Pease v. Rathbun-Jones Engineering Company, 1916, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Rathbun-Jones Engineering Company. The dispute arose when Mr. Pease claimed that he was entitled to a patent for an invention related to concrete construction which he alleged had been infringed upon by Rathbun-Jones Engineering Co., who were using similar technology in their work. However, it was found that Mr. Pease's claim lacked merit as his supposed invention did not meet the novelty and non-obviousness requirements necessary for patent protection under U.S law at that time; it had already been described in prior patents and publications before his application date and thus could not be patented again by him or anyone else.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Pease v. Rathbun-Jones Engineering Company argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling, which held that an employer was not liable for injuries sustained by an employee due to negligence on part of another employee, was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that this interpretation failed to consider important aspects of employment law and did not adequately protect workers' rights. They contended that employers should be held responsible for ensuring safe working conditions and practices among their employees, arguing further that if one worker's negligence leads to harm or injury of another worker while performing duties within the scope of their employment, then it is only justifiable for the employer bear responsibility as they are in control over work environment and have power over hiring competent staffs. Thus, according to them such liability could serve as incentive for employers towards maintaining safer workplaces.