In the case of Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Vance, Trustee in Bankruptcy (1957), the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving bankruptcy law and commercial transactions. The issue at hand was whether or not Safeway could reclaim goods sold to a bankrupt company on credit before it filed for bankruptcy but delivered after the filing date. According to Section 60 of the Bankruptcy Act, such reclamation is only possible if delivery occurred while insolvency was suspected by both parties involved in transaction; however, this condition wasn't met as per court's findings. Safeway argued that they had a right to reclaim under state law which allowed sellers to retrieve goods from insolvent buyers within ten days of delivery if no third party rights were affected - an argument rejected by lower courts due its conflict with federal laws. The Supreme Court upheld these rulings stating that federal bankruptcy laws supersede conflicting state provisions and denied Safeway’s claim for reclamation since conditions set forth by Section 60 weren’t satisfied.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Vance argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and misinterpreted the Bankruptcy Act. The dissent contended that under Section 60a of this act, a preference requires an effect on creditors' rights rather than merely intent by debtor or creditor to prefer. They believed that Safeway did not receive any more than they would have received through bankruptcy proceedings if all unsecured creditors had been paid proportionately - thus no 'preference' occurred as defined by law. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "insolvent" within Section 1(19), arguing it should be understood as inability to pay debts promptly in ordinary course of business instead of balance-sheet insolvency (liabilities exceeding assets). In their view, there was insufficient evidence proving insolvency at time when alleged preferences were made.