In the case of Hewitt-Robins Incorporated v. Eastern Freight-Ways, Inc., 1962, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a shipper could recover damages from a carrier for loss or damage to goods transported under an interstate bill of lading. The court ruled in favor of Hewitt-Robins Incorporated (HRI), stating that HRI had not waived its right to sue by accepting delivery without noting any visible damage on the receipt document. The court further held that Eastern Freight-Ways, Inc., as a common carrier, bore responsibility for proving it was free from negligence and had taken all necessary precautions against foreseeable risks during transportation. This ruling clarified carriers' liability under federal law and affirmed shippers' rights to seek compensation even when no apparent damage is noted at delivery.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Hewitt-Robins Incorporated v. Eastern Freight-Ways, Inc., argued that the majority's decision to hold Eastern Freight-Ways liable for damages was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there was not enough evidence to prove negligence on behalf of Eastern Freight-Ways and therefore they should not be held responsible for the damage caused during transportation. They also disagreed with the interpretation of "free from harm" clause in the contract between Hewitt-Robins and Eastern Freight-ways, arguing it did not necessarily imply a guarantee against all potential damage but rather an obligation to exercise reasonable care in handling goods. Furthermore, they pointed out inconsistencies within previous rulings regarding similar cases which further complicated their stance on this particular case.