In the case of Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Wright (1915), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mr. Wright, a farmer who sued the railway company for damages caused by fire to his property due to sparks from one of their locomotives. The court held that under Iowa state law, which was applicable in this case, railroads were liable for any damage caused by fires started as a result of operating their trains unless they could prove they had used all necessary precautions and care to prevent such incidents from happening - something that the railroad company failed to do so convincingly during trial proceedings. The ruling affirmed an earlier decision made by lower courts awarding damages worth $1,500 ($38k today) plus costs incurred during litigation process to Mr.Wright while also setting precedence on how future cases involving similar circumstances would be handled across jurisdictions where similar laws applied.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Wright, it was argued that there was no legal basis to hold a railroad company liable for damages caused by sparks from one of its locomotives igniting nearby property. The dissenting justices contended that railroads are not inherently dangerous and should not be subjected to strict liability rules typically applied to hazardous activities or substances. They maintained that accidents such as fires caused by sparks are rare occurrences and cannot be reasonably anticipated or prevented in every instance due to the nature of steam-powered locomotion at the time. Therefore, they believed it unjustifiable to impose an absolute duty on railway companies under these circumstances without evidence of negligence or misconduct on their part.