In Boise County Commissioners v. Gorman, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a county could be held liable for damages caused by a defective bridge. The plaintiff, Gorman, had been injured when his wagon fell through a bridge that had been built by the county. Gorman argued that the county was liable for his injuries because it had failed to properly maintain the bridge. The Supreme Court held that the county was not liable for Gorman's injuries. The Court reasoned that the county had not been negligent in its maintenance of the bridge, and that the bridge had been built in accordance with the standards of the time. Furthermore, the Court noted that the county had not been aware of the bridge's condition prior to the accident. The Court concluded that the county was not liable for Gorman's injuries, and that Gorman had failed to prove that the county had been negligent in its maintenance of the bridge. The Court's decision established that a county cannot be held liable for damages caused by a defective bridge unless it had been negligent in its maintenance of the bridge.

In the case of Boise County Commissioners v. Gorman, the dissenting opinion argued that Congress had not intended to limit a state's power to tax property within its borders when it passed the 1866 Civil Rights Act. The majority opinion held that this act did in fact restrict states' ability to tax certain types of property owned by African Americans and other minorities, but Justice Field dissented on this point. He argued that such an interpretation would be contrary to both the language and intent of Congress when they passed this law. Furthermore, he noted that if such a restriction were imposed upon states then it could lead them into financial ruin as their revenue sources would be drastically reduced without any corresponding benefit for those affected by taxation laws. Ultimately, Justice Field concluded his dissent with a plea for caution before making sweeping changes which could have far-reaching implications beyond what was originally intended by Congress at the time of passage