In the United States v. Howard P. Foley Co., Inc., 1946, the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving government contracts during World War II. The Howard P. Foley Company had entered into a contract with the U.S government to provide electrical installations at an ordnance plant in Virginia but failed to complete it within the stipulated time due to labor shortages and other unforeseen difficulties caused by war conditions. After completion of work, they sought additional compensation for increased costs incurred due to these delays under Article 3(a) of their contract which allowed adjustments for changes ordered by Contracting Officer or his superior officers not including "the Contracting Officer's Representative". The court held that orders from 'Contracting Officer’s Representatives' were not included within this provision and therefore did not entitle them to extra compensation as claimed under Article 3(a). This decision clarified contractual obligations between private contractors and federal agencies during wartime situations.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Howard P. Foley Co., Inc., Justice Frankfurter disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 2(b) of the Walsh-Healey Act, which pertains to government contracts and minimum wage requirements. He argued that this section should not be interpreted as a penalty provision but rather as an enforcement mechanism designed to ensure compliance with labor standards set by Congress. According to him, if contractors fail to pay their employees at least the minimum wages stipulated in their contracts, they are liable for damages equivalent to underpaid amounts regardless of whether these were paid back later or not. This liability is meant as a deterrent against non-compliance and does not constitute double compensation for workers who have already received back-payments from employers found guilty of violating wage provisions.