In the case of Cincinnati Street Railway Company v. Snell, 1900, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Snell. The dispute arose when a streetcar owned by the Cincinnati Street Railway Company collided with a wagon driven by Snell causing him injuries and damaging his vehicle. He sued for damages alleging negligence on part of the company's driver who was operating at an excessive speed without proper lookout or warning signals. The railway company argued that it was not liable as per Ohio state law which stated that anyone riding upon any portion of a vehicle not designed for passengers would be considered to have assumed all risks associated with such action. However, Justice Harlan delivered the opinion stating that this statute did not apply since Mr. Snell had been driving his own wagon and wasn't "riding" on any part of another vehicle as specified in said law; hence he hadn't voluntarily assumed risk involved in negligent operation by others' vehicles. Therefore, they held that there were no grounds to dismiss plaintiff’s claim based solely on this statute and remanded it back to lower court for further proceedings.

In the dissenting opinion for Cincinnati Street Railway Company v. Snell, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a city ordinance requiring street railway companies to maintain and repair public roads was an unconstitutional delegation of governmental duties. He contended that it is not within the power of any municipal corporation to compel private corporations or individuals to perform such services without just compensation. The duty of maintaining and repairing streets is a public one, which should be discharged by public authorities at the expense of all who are under their jurisdiction. Therefore, he believed this obligation could not be shifted onto a single company simply because they operate on those streets - especially when there was no evidence suggesting these operations caused additional wear and tear necessitating extra maintenance or repairs.