In the case of Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. Driggers (1928), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, reversing a decision by the Florida Supreme Court. The plaintiff, Driggers, was injured while working for the railroad company and sought compensation under Florida's Workmen's Compensation Act. However, this act did not apply to employees involved in interstate commerce at their time of injury - such as Driggers - due to federal laws regulating railway workers' rights and protections taking precedence over state law. The court held that since his employment was part of interstate commerce at the time he sustained injuries, only federal law could provide remedies for him; thus making it impossible for him to claim benefits under Florida’s Workers’ Compensation Act.

In the dissenting opinion for Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. Driggers, it was argued that the court majority had incorrectly applied legal principles related to negligence and contributory negligence. The dissenting justices believed that there were factual disputes in this case which should have been resolved by a jury rather than decided as matters of law by judges. They contended that whether or not Mr. Driggers had acted negligently when he crossed the railroad tracks, and whether his alleged negligence contributed to his injuries, were questions best left to a jury's determination based on all evidence presented at trial. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's conclusion that Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company could not be held liable because its employees did nothing wrong; instead, they asserted that if company policies created an unsafe condition leading to injury then liability may exist regardless of individual employee actions.