In the case of Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc., v. Ellerman Lines, Ltd., et al., 1961, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with deciding who should bear responsibility for damaged cargo that occurred during unloading operations. The dispute arose when a crane operated by Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores (A&G), an independent contractor hired to unload cargo from a ship owned by Ellerman Lines Ltd., dropped and damaged some machinery due to negligence in handling. A&G argued that they were not liable for damages because their contract with Ellerman included a "Himalaya Clause," which extended defenses available under maritime law to contractors like themselves. However, the court ruled against A&G stating that such clauses only protect parties involved in actual carriage of goods at sea and do not extend protection to those performing services on land after arrival at port. Therefore, as per this ruling, stevedoring companies could be held responsible for damage caused through negligent conduct while loading or unloading ships.

In the dissenting opinion for Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc., v. Ellerman Lines, Ltd., et al., Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with established principles of maritime law and could have far-reaching implications for future cases. He contended that a stevedore should not be held liable for damages to cargo unless it can be proven that they were negligent in their duties. In this case, he believed there was insufficient evidence to prove negligence on part of Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "bailment" contracts and suggested that such an interpretation would unfairly burden stevedores who are already operating under difficult conditions and tight deadlines at ports around the world.