In the case of Eichel v. New York Central Railroad Co., 1963, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of plaintiff Robert Eichel, a railroad worker who had been injured on the job and was seeking damages under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). The defendant, New York Central Railroad Company argued that evidence of Eichel's receipt of disability benefits from another source should be admissible to mitigate potential damage awards. However, this argument was rejected by both lower courts and ultimately by the Supreme Court as well. The court held that such evidence could prejudice a jury against awarding full damages to an injured party because they might believe he is already being compensated elsewhere for his injuries. This ruling established important precedent regarding collateral sources rule which prohibits admission into evidence information about compensation received from sources other than defendant.

In the dissenting opinion for Eichel v. New York Central Railroad Co., Justice Goldberg argued that the majority's decision to allow evidence of a plaintiff's receipt of collateral benefits, such as social security or pensions, into court proceedings was fundamentally unfair and contrary to established legal principles. He contended that this practice could prejudice juries against plaintiffs by suggesting they were already adequately compensated for their injuries. Furthermore, he pointed out that these benefits are not gratuitous but rather earned through years of work and contributions; thus it is unjust to permit defendants to benefit from them in litigation. Moreover, he warned about potential complications arising from trying to determine what constitutes a collateral source and how much should be deducted from damages awarded by juries.