In the 1903 case of Beasley v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co., the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company, reversing a judgment from a lower court that had awarded damages to Beasley for injuries he sustained while working as an employee. The Supreme Court found that there was not enough evidence to prove negligence on part of the railway company and thus it could not be held liable for Beasley's injuries. The court stated that although employers are responsible for providing their employees with safe work environments, they cannot guarantee absolute safety or be expected to anticipate every possible accident scenario. Therefore, unless clear proof of negligence can be demonstrated by an injured party, employers should not automatically bear responsibility for workplace accidents.

In the dissenting opinion for Beasley v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co., it was argued that the court erred in its decision to uphold a lower court's ruling against Mr. Beasley, who had sued the railway company for injuries sustained while working as an employee of a contractor hired by the railroad company. The dissenting justices believed that under common law principles, even though Beasley was not directly employed by the railway company, they still owed him a duty of care because he was performing work on their behalf and on their property at their request. They contended that this obligation should extend to providing safe equipment and ensuring safety measures were followed during work operations - which did not happen in this case leading to his injury. Therefore, they felt Mr.Beasley should have been allowed to pursue damages from both his direct employer (the contractor) and indirectly from Texas & Pacific Railway Company.