In County of Randolph v. Post, the United States Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a county could be held liable for damages caused by a defective bridge. The plaintiff, Post, was injured when his horse and wagon fell through a bridge that had been built by the county. Post 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 Post'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 applicable laws and regulations. The Court also noted that the county had no duty to inspect the bridge, and that the county was not responsible for any defects that may have existed in the bridge. The Court concluded that the county was not liable for Post's injuries, and that Post could not recover damages from the county. This decision established that a county is not liable for damages caused by a defective bridge unless the county was negligent in its maintenance of the bridge.

In the case of County of Randolph v. Post, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a county could be held liable for damages caused by its failure to repair a bridge on one of its roads. The majority opinion found that counties were not liable in such cases because they had no legal duty or obligation to maintain bridges and roads. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that counties should be held responsible for maintaining public highways and bridges under their control as part of their general responsibility to provide safe passage for citizens traveling within their jurisdiction. He further argued that if local governments are allowed to neglect these duties without consequence, it would lead to an increase in dangerous conditions on public roadways which would ultimately put travelers at risk.