In the United States v. Kansas Flour Mills Corporation case of 1941, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, affirming that a contract between Kansas Flour Mills and Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation (FSCC) was valid and enforceable. The FSCC had contracted with Kansas Flour Mills to purchase flour at an agreed price for distribution as relief supplies during the Great Depression. However, when wheat prices fell dramatically due to market conditions, making it cheaper for FSCC to buy on open market than from Kansas Flour Mills under their existing contract terms, they attempted to cancel their agreement with them. The court held that despite these changed circumstances or hardship faced by one party after entering into a contract does not render it unenforceable unless there is explicit provision allowing such termination within the contractual terms itself.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Kansas Flour Mills Corporation, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold the corporation liable for damages caused by a fire on leased government property contradicted established principles of contract law and unjustly penalized the lessee. The dissenting justices contended that under normal circumstances, liability would be determined based on negligence or breach of specific contractual obligations - neither of which were proven in this case. They further pointed out that while there was an agreement to return the premises in good condition, such clauses are typically interpreted as excluding damage from unforeseen events beyond control like fires unless explicitly stated otherwise. Thus, they believed it unfair to impose an absolute obligation upon Kansas Flour Mills Corporation without clear evidence supporting their culpability or explicit terms within their lease requiring them to bear all risks associated with accidental fires.