In the United States Trust Company v. Wabash Western Railway Company case of 1893, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving railway company bonds and their associated mortgage rights. The court held that when a corporation issues bonds secured by a mortgage, it cannot subsequently issue additional bonds with equal lien status without explicit authorization in the original agreement or consent from existing bondholders. This decision was based on an interpretation of contract law principles and aimed to protect bondholder rights against dilution through unauthorized issuance of new debt securities with similar claims on assets as existing ones.

In the dissenting opinion for United States Trust Company v. Wabash Western Railway Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling allowing foreclosure on a railway company violated principles of equity and fairness. The dissenters believed that the mortgage contract between U.S. Trust and Wabash should not have been interpreted as an absolute conveyance of property rights, but rather as security for debt repayment only. They contended that by permitting foreclosure under these circumstances, the Court effectively allowed U.S. Trust to profit from its own wrongdoing - namely, lending money irresponsibly in full knowledge of Wabash's precarious financial situation at the time of loan issuance - which contravenes established legal norms against unjust enrichment at another’s expense or through one’s own misconduct.