In the 1912 case of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company v. Schwyhart, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company. The dispute arose when Schwyhart sued for damages after a train collision resulted in injury to his livestock that were being transported by the railway company. The court held that under their contract, which limited liability unless negligence could be proven on part of the carrier, Schwyhart was not entitled to compensation as he failed to prove negligence or misconduct by any employees of the railroad company during transportation. This decision reinforced contractual limitations on carrier liability for damage during transport in absence of proven negligence.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company v. Schwyhart argued that the court majority had erred in its interpretation of the law regarding liability for accidents occurring on railway property. The dissent contended that a railroad company should not be held responsible for injuries sustained by individuals who were trespassing on their property without permission or lawful reason to do so. They maintained that while railroads have an obligation to ensure safety within reasonable bounds, they cannot be expected to foresee every potential accident involving unauthorized persons entering their premises unlawfully or negligently. Therefore, according to this view, it was unjustified and unreasonable for the court majority to rule against the railway company when there was no clear evidence indicating negligence on their part leading directly to Mr. Schwyhart's injury.