In the case of Ryan v. United States, 1922, the Supreme Court ruled on an issue related to maritime law and salvage rights. The plaintiff, Thomas F. Ryan, was a diver who had recovered valuable cargo from a sunken ship off the coast of Virginia during World War I. He claimed that he should be entitled to full ownership or at least substantial compensation for his efforts under international laws governing marine salvage operations. The government argued that since it owned both the vessel and its contents when they sank (as part of war-related activities), it retained ownership even after their recovery by Ryan's team. The court sided with the government in this matter stating that while salvors are typically rewarded for their services based on factors like risk involved and value saved; these principles do not apply when property is lost due to acts of war as such losses are considered beyond human control. Therefore, despite acknowledging Ryan's significant contribution in recovering valuable goods from a dangerous environment - which would ordinarily entitle him to some form of reward - his claim was denied because wartime circumstances changed how traditional rules applied.

In the dissenting opinion for Ryan v. United States, Justice Holmes argued that the defendant's conviction should be overturned because he was not given a fair trial. He believed that the evidence presented against him was insufficient and circumstantial at best, which did not meet the standard of proof required in criminal cases - beyond reasonable doubt. Furthermore, he criticized how certain pieces of evidence were handled during proceedings and felt there were procedural errors made by lower courts that violated due process rights of defendant. The justice also took issue with how jury instructions were delivered in this case; arguing they lacked clarity and could have led to confusion among jurors about what exactly they needed to determine guilt or innocence on each charge faced by defendant. In essence, his main contention revolved around ensuring every individual is granted their constitutional right to a fair trial regardless of crime committed or charges brought against them.