In the case of Bernard Permoli v. Municipality No. 1 of the City of New Orleans, Permoli brought a suit against the municipality for damages caused by an alleged breach in contract. The municipality had hired him to build a levee and he claimed that they failed to pay him for his work as agreed upon in their contract. He argued that this constituted a breach and sought compensation from them accordingly. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the defendant, finding that there was no evidence presented which showed any agreement between both parties regarding payment or other terms related to such an arrangement; therefore, it could not be established whether or not there was indeed a breach on behalf of either party involved.

In the case of Bernard Permoli v. Municipality No. 1 of the City of New Orleans, Justice McLean delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the plaintiff had not been denied due process and was therefore entitled to compensation for his property taken by the defendant municipality. He reasoned that although there were certain procedural irregularities in how this particular taking occurred, these did not rise to a level where they would constitute a denial of due process or an unconstitutional deprivation of property without just compensation. Furthermore, he argued that it was within Congress' power to provide relief from such takings if it chose to do so and thus any remedy should come from them rather than through judicial action on behalf of Mr. Permoli's claim against Municipality No. 1 for damages resulting from their taking his land without providing him with just compensation as required by law at the time