The Detroit & Mackinac Railway Company v. Fletcher Paper Company case in 1918 revolved around a dispute over freight charges for the transportation of paper between two cities in Michigan. The Fletcher Paper Company had contracted with the railway company to transport its goods, but later disputed the amount charged by claiming that it was excessive and unreasonable. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company, stating that as long as rates were filed with and approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), they were deemed reasonable and lawful. Therefore, any contract made under these rates could not be challenged on grounds of reasonableness or excessiveness. This ruling reinforced ICC's authority over rate regulation while also emphasizing contractual obligations between parties.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Detroit & Mackinac Railway Company v. Fletcher Paper Company argued that the majority's decision to hold the railway company liable for damages was incorrect. The dissent believed that there was no breach of contract by the railway company as they had made every reasonable effort to fulfill their obligations under difficult circumstances caused by a nationwide coal shortage, which was beyond their control. They contended that it is unreasonable and unjust to penalize a party for failing to meet contractual obligations due to unforeseen events or 'acts of God'. Furthermore, they pointed out inconsistencies in how similar cases were judged previously and expressed concern about setting an unfair precedent where companies could be held responsible for factors outside their control.