In Dunlap v. Northeastern Railroad Company, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a railroad company was liable for damages caused by a train accident. The plaintiff, Dunlap, was a passenger on the train when it collided with another train. He was injured in the accident and sued the railroad company for damages. The Supreme Court held that the railroad company was liable for the damages caused by the accident. The Court reasoned that the railroad company had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of its trains and that it had breached this duty by failing to take proper precautions to prevent the accident. The Court also held that the railroad company was liable for the damages even though the accident was caused by the negligence of the other train's engineer. The Court's decision established that railroad companies are liable for damages caused by their negligence, even if the negligence of another party contributed to the accident. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then and has become an important precedent in the area of railroad liability.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Dunlap v. Northeastern Railroad Company, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to both precedent and common sense. He argued that a railroad company should not be held liable for damages caused by an act of God, such as a tornado or flood, because it is impossible for them to prevent these occurrences from happening. Furthermore, he argued that if they were held liable then other industries would also have to bear responsibility for similar events which could lead to absurd results. He concluded his dissent by stating that while there may be cases where railroads can be found negligent due to their own actions or omissions, this case did not meet those criteria and thus no liability should attach itself on the defendant railroad company in this instance.