The United States v. Spearin case in 1918 revolved around a dispute between the U.S. government and George B. Spearin, a contractor who was hired to construct a dry dock at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. The plans provided by the government included relocating an existing storm sewer; however, after completion of this part of work, it failed due to external factors not accounted for in the specifications given by the government. As such, Mr. Spearin refused to proceed with further construction until he was indemnified against future issues related to this defect but his contract was terminated instead for alleged delay. Spearin sued on grounds that he had followed all instructions and any defects were due solely to faulty specifications from the Government's side which constituted breach of warranty - even if it wasn't explicitly stated in their agreement. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mr.Spearin stating that when a contractor is bound to build according to plans and specifications prepared by another party (the owner), they will not be responsible for consequences arising out of defects or insufficiencies within those plans unless otherwise specified. This ruling established what came later known as "Spearin Doctrine" which still holds relevance today regarding implied warranties during construction contracts.

There was no dissenting opinion in the United States v. Spearin case of 1918. The decision by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., on behalf of a unanimous court, established what is now known as the "Spearin Doctrine." This doctrine holds that when a contractor follows the plans and specifications furnished by an owner, and those plans turn out to be defective or insufficient, the contractor will not be held liable for any damage or defect resulting from following those instructions.