The Sarah Hazard case was a dispute between the United States and an individual, Sarah Hazard. The Supreme Court heard the case in 1823 to determine whether or not Ms. Hazard had a valid claim against the government for damages caused by its negligence. In her complaint, she alleged that while working as a seamstress at one of the Navy Yards in Philadelphia, she suffered injuries due to unsafe conditions created by negligent maintenance of machinery used on site. She argued that these injuries were caused directly by government negligence and sought compensation for her medical expenses and lost wages from her job during recovery time. The court ultimately found in favor of Ms Hazards' claims; ruling that since it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that hazardous conditions existed at the Navy Yard due to lack of proper care taken by those responsible for maintaining it, then they were liable for any resulting harm done to individuals such as Ms Hazard who worked there under their supervision.

In the case of Sarah Hazard, the dissenting opinion argued that a woman's right to her own property should be respected and upheld. The majority opinion had ruled that when a married woman died without leaving any children or other heirs, her husband was entitled to all of her estate. However, in this particular case it was found that Sarah Hazard had inherited land from an uncle prior to marrying and thus she owned it independently of her husband. Therefore, according to the dissenters' view, upon Sarah's death he should not have been allowed access or control over this property as it did not belong solely to him but rather belonged jointly between them both. Furthermore they argued that if such a ruling were accepted then women would no longer be able to hold onto their own possessions after marriage due their husbands being given full rights over them regardless of whether those possessions were acquired before or during marriage.