In the case of Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Nichols in 1923, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land rights and railway construction. The plaintiff, Nichols, owned land that was bisected by tracks laid down by the defendant railway company without his permission or any legal right to do so. When he sued for damages and removal of the track from his property, lower courts awarded him $1 in nominal damages but refused to order removal of the track due to public interest considerations - it had been used for several years as part of an important rail line. The Supreme Court upheld this decision with Justice Holmes delivering its opinion; while acknowledging that normally such trespass would warrant removal of offending structures (in this case railroad tracks), they found compelling reasons not to enforce such remedy here: mainly because removing these particular tracks would disrupt transportation services vital for many communities along its route.

In the dissenting opinion for Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Nichols, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to hold the railway company liable for damages caused by a fire started by one of its locomotives. He argued that there was no negligence on part of the railroad as it had taken all reasonable precautions to prevent such an incident from occurring. Furthermore, he contended that holding companies responsible in this manner would set a dangerous precedent and could potentially cripple industries vital to national growth and development due to excessive litigation costs. In his view, accidents like these were unfortunate but inevitable consequences of industrial progress which should be borne collectively by society rather than being placed solely on individual entities.