In the case of Smith v. United States, 1958, the Supreme Court ruled on whether a federal statute that made it illegal to rob or attempt to rob any person having lawful charge, control or custody of mail matter was applicable when an individual attempted to steal from a post office employee who had finished his route and returned home for the day. The defendant argued that since he robbed the postal worker at his residence after working hours and not while he was actively delivering mail, this law did not apply. However, the court disagreed with this interpretation. They held that as long as there is some nexus between possession of mail matter by a postal employee and their official duties - even if they are off duty or away from their usual place of work - then robbing them can be considered a violation under this statute.

In the dissenting opinion for Smith v. United States, Justice Whittaker argued that the majority's interpretation of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) was incorrect and overly broad. He contended that under a proper reading of the FTCA, it does not waive sovereign immunity for all acts or omissions by federal employees but only those which are negligent or wrongful. In this case, he believed there was no negligence on part of government officials in their decision to arrest and detain Smith without trial during wartime under suspicion of being an enemy alien - they were merely performing their duties as required by law and executive order. Therefore, according to Justice Whittaker’s view, such discretionary actions should be exempt from liability under FTCA unless proven malicious or corrupt.