In the case of Rainier Brewing Company v. Great Northern Pacific Steamship Company, 1921, the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over damages incurred during transportation. The Rainier Brewing Co., based in Seattle, had contracted with Great Northern Pacific Steamship Co. to transport beer from Seattle to Yokohama and Kobe in Japan. However, due to alleged negligence by the steamship company's employees while loading and stowing cargo on board their ship, several cases of beer were damaged or destroyed entirely. The brewing company sued for compensation but was initially denied by lower courts because they failed to provide notice within three days after delivery as required under the bill of lading (the contract between them). On appeal though, it was found that this requirement could be waived if there was evidence showing that the carrier knew about damage before such notice would have been given. The Supreme Court upheld this decision stating that knowledge on part of carrier is equivalent to formal notice from consignee (receiver) regarding any damage caused during transit; hence no need for separate notification within stipulated time frame.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Rainier Brewing Company v. Great Northern Pacific Steamship Company argued that the majority's decision to hold the steamship company liable for damages was incorrect. The dissent believed that there was no breach of contract by the steamship company as it had made every reasonable effort to deliver goods on time, but were delayed due to unforeseen circumstances beyond their control (a storm). They contended that such events should be considered "acts of God," which would exempt them from liability under common law principles. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation and application of maritime law, arguing instead for a more traditional understanding where carriers are not held responsible for uncontrollable delays in shipping schedules.