In the case of Alabama & Vicksburg Railway Company et al. v. Jackson & Eastern Railway Company, 1925, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute between two railway companies over rights to use certain tracks and facilities in Mississippi. The Alabama & Vicksburg Railway (A&V) had leased these assets from another company with an agreement that it would maintain them for joint use by other railroads including Jackson & Eastern (J&E). However, A&V later attempted to terminate this arrangement claiming J&E was not paying its fair share of maintenance costs as per their contract terms. The lower court sided with J&E stating that A&V could not unilaterally end the agreement without proving breach of contract or obtaining legal permission through proper channels like Interstate Commerce Commission approval. On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld this decision affirming that contractual obligations cannot be arbitrarily discarded especially when they involve public utilities such as railways which have significant societal impact.

In the dissenting opinion for Alabama & Vicksburg Railway Company et al. v. Jackson & Eastern Railway Company, the justice argued that there was no legal basis to prevent a state from granting a charter to build and operate a railway line on its own territory, even if it crossed an existing interstate railway line. The justice contended that states have sovereign rights over their territories and can grant such charters as long as they do not interfere with interstate commerce or violate federal laws. He also pointed out that in this case, there was no evidence of any interference with interstate commerce or violation of federal law by the new railway company's operations across the existing line. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold an injunction against building and operating this new rail line based on alleged violations of anti-trust laws.