In the case of United States v. Standard Oil Co., 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a private company could not be held liable for damages to government property caused during wartime service unless it was proven that they had acted with negligence or beyond their contractual obligations. The case arose from an incident in World War II when a tanker owned by Standard Oil Company and chartered by the U.S. Government was torpedoed and sunk by enemy forces, resulting in loss of cargo belonging to the government. The court found no evidence of negligence on part of Standard Oil and stated that risks associated with war were assumed by the government under its charter agreement with private companies providing services during wartime.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Standard Oil Co., 1965 case argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and misinterpreted the Robinson-Patman Act. The dissenters believed that there was no substantial evidence to prove that Standard Oil had engaged in price discrimination, which would have violated antitrust laws. They contended that a company should not be penalized for offering lower prices unless it is proven beyond reasonable doubt they intended to create a monopoly or lessen competition significantly. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's assertion about 'meeting competition' defense under Section 2(b) of Robinson-Patman Act; arguing instead this provision allows any person to rebut charges of illegal price discrimination by showing their conduct was done in good faith effort to meet an equally low price of a competitor.