In the 1913 case Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company v. Arizona and Colorado Railroad Company of New Mexico, the U.S. Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a railroad company could be held liable for damages caused by sparks from its locomotives setting fire to property along its tracks. The plaintiff, Arizona and Colorado Railroad Company of New Mexico, claimed that their timberland had been damaged due to such fires started by trains operated by the defendant, Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company. However, the court ruled in favor of Denver and Rio Grande on grounds that there were no laws or regulations requiring them to equip their locomotives with spark arresters at that time nor any evidence proving negligence on their part causing these fires. Therefore it concluded that they cannot be held responsible for damage caused under these circumstances.

In the dissenting opinion for Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company v. Arizona and Colorado Railroad Company of New Mexico, the justice argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of Arizona and Colorado was incorrect. The dissenting justice believed that Denver and Rio Grande had a legitimate claim over certain railroad tracks due to prior usage rights established by an agreement between both parties. He contended that this agreement should have been honored despite any subsequent changes in ownership or management. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of relevant state laws governing railway operations, arguing instead for a more literal reading which would have favored Denver and Rio Grande's position.