In the 1893 case of Galveston, Harrisburg and San Antonio Railway Company v. Gonzales, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Mexican citizen who was injured while working for an American railway company in Mexico. The plaintiff, Mr. Gonzales, sued the railway company under Texas law which allowed employees to sue their employers for injuries sustained due to negligence on part of the employer or its agents. The defendant argued that since Mr.Gonzales was employed and injured in Mexico, he should not be able to sue under Texas law as it would violate international comity (respect between nations). However, Justice Gray delivered the opinion stating that there is no violation of international comity because foreign corporations doing business within a state are subject to local laws regarding liability towards their workers regardless where they were hired or injured.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Galveston, Harrisburg and San Antonio Railway Company v. Gonzales, Justice Brewer argued that there was no evidence to suggest negligence on part of the railway company. He noted that it is not enough to simply show an accident occurred; rather, it must be demonstrated that this accident resulted from a failure in duty or care by the defendant. In this case, he believed such proof was lacking. Furthermore, he expressed concern about setting a precedent where companies could be held liable without clear evidence of fault or negligence on their part.