The Martello case of 1893 revolved around a dispute over the salvage rights to a shipwreck. The schooner, "Martello," was stranded and abandoned near Cape Hatteras in North Carolina. Another vessel, the "Pioneer," discovered it and attempted to save its cargo but failed due to bad weather conditions. Subsequently, another salvaging company successfully retrieved the goods from Martello's wreckage. This led to a legal battle between Pioneer’s owners who claimed they were entitled for compensation as they were first on scene and made initial efforts at rescue, while others argued that only successful salvage operations should be rewarded. The U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Pioneer’s owners stating that their unsuccessful attempts still constituted as 'salvage services' under maritime law because they had voluntarily endangered themselves trying to save another's property without any formal contract or assurance of payment - thus meriting reward even though their efforts did not result in success.

In the dissenting opinion for The Martello case, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling on salvage rights was incorrect. The dissent focused on two main points: first, they believed that the original owners of the salvaged vessel had not abandoned their property and thus still held rightful claim to it; secondly, they contended that even if abandonment could be proven, there were serious doubts about whether or not those who found and claimed the ship did so in good faith. They felt these individuals may have been aware of its previous ownership and intentionally withheld this information in order to profit from its sale. Therefore, according to this view, either way - whether through lack of proof for abandonment or potential dishonesty by those claiming salvage rights - justice would best be served by returning possession of The Martello back to its original owners.