In the case of Kansas City Southern Railway Company v. Leslie, Administrator of OL, 1914, the U.S. Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a railway company could be held liable for injuries sustained by an employee who was not on duty at the time of his accident but was still within the premises of his employer. The plaintiff argued that since he had been allowed to sleep in a caboose while waiting for his next shift and got injured when it unexpectedly moved due to another train's impact, he should receive compensation under federal law (the Federal Employers' Liability Act). However, after careful consideration of all facts and circumstances surrounding this incident as well as relevant legal principles applicable thereto such as contributory negligence and assumption of risk doctrine among others; it ultimately ruled in favor of defendant - holding that there existed no liability on part its because plaintiff's injury did not occur during course employment or arise out any duties owed him by employer under said statute.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kansas City Southern Railway Company v. Leslie, Administrator of OL argued that the majority had erred in their interpretation and application of federal law regarding railway safety regulations. The dissent contended that these laws were designed to protect employees from harm due to negligence on the part of employers, not to absolve them entirely from responsibility for their own actions or lack thereof. They believed that if an employee knowingly and willingly put themselves at risk by failing to use available safety equipment or disregarding established procedures, they should bear some degree of liability for any resulting injuries. This perspective emphasized personal accountability over employer culpability as a key factor in determining legal outcomes related to workplace accidents on railways.