In the 1890 Supreme Court case, The E.A. Packer, Scully Claimant, the court examined a dispute over maritime law and salvage rights. The steamship E.A. Packer had run aground on a sandbar near Sandy Hook in New Jersey during a storm and was abandoned by its crew due to perceived danger of sinking or breaking apart. A group of salvors arrived at the scene with tugboats and successfully refloated the ship without any assistance from her original crew who were safely ashore at that time. When they claimed their right for salvage compensation against owner's refusal to pay arguing that his vessel was never abandoned as he didn't give express permission for abandonment nor did he hire them for rescue operation; it led to litigation which reached up till Supreme Court. The court ruled in favor of salvors stating that under maritime law, an actual total abandonment is not necessary but only such acts are required which show intention of desertion without hope or intent of recovery by owners themselves but leaving it open for others who dare risk saving property thus stranded or endangered; hence awarding them full salvage rights even though there wasn’t explicit consent from ship’s owner.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of The E. A. Packer, Scully Claimant, 1890, Justice Bradley argued that a maritime lien should not be granted to suppliers who provided coal to a vessel without any explicit contract or agreement with its owners. He contended that such an arrangement would create unnecessary confusion and uncertainty in commercial transactions involving ships and their supplies. Furthermore, he believed it was unjustified to hold shipowners liable for debts they did not personally incur or authorize. According to him, only those who have direct contractual relationships with shipowners should be able to claim liens against vessels.