In the case of The Pusey & Jones Company v. Hanssen in 1922, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving shipbuilding contracts and warranties. The Pusey & Jones Company had contracted with Hanssen to build a vessel according to specific plans and designs provided by Hanssen. However, upon completion, it was found that the vessel did not meet its intended speed or fuel efficiency due to flaws in design specifications given by Hanssen himself. Despite this fact, he refused payment claiming breach of warranty for failure of performance. The court held that while there was an implied warranty that the ship would be seaworthy and fit for its intended purpose based on industry standards at time of construction; no such guarantee existed regarding performance outcomes as these were largely dependent on design inputs provided by customer (Hanssen). Therefore, since Pusey & Jones built the ship according to agreed-upon specifications without any inherent defects in their workmanship or materials used - they fulfilled their contractual obligations and were entitled to full payment.

In the dissenting opinion for The Pusey & Jones Company v. Hanssen, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to hold Pusey & Jones liable for damages on a ship they had built and sold to Hanssen. He argued that there was no evidence of fraud or concealment by the company in selling the ship, nor any warranty regarding its condition beyond what was explicitly stated in their contract. Holmes believed that it should be up to buyers like Hanssen to inspect goods before purchasing them and bear responsibility if they fail to do so adequately. Furthermore, he contended that even if there were some implied warranty as claimed by the plaintiff, it would not cover defects which could have been discovered through reasonable inspection prior to purchase.