In the case of Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company v. West Coast Naval Stores Company in 1904, the U.S Supreme Court examined whether a railroad company could be held liable for damages to goods that were transported by multiple carriers. The plaintiff, West Coast Naval Stores Company, had shipped turpentine via two different railroads - first on Louisville and Nashville Railroad (L&N), then transferred to Southern Railway. When received, some barrels were damaged. The court ruled in favor of L&N because it was not proven that they caused the damage during their segment of transportation; there was no evidence showing when or where along the route the damage occurred. This ruling established an important precedent: when goods are transported by successive carriers under separate contracts, each carrier is responsible only for any loss or damage occurring while it has custody of those goods unless otherwise agreed upon.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company v. West Coast Naval Stores Company argued that the majority's decision to allow a railroad company to limit its liability for damages caused during transportation was incorrect. The dissent believed this ruling contradicted previous decisions made by the court, which held that common carriers could not contract away their responsibility for negligence or misconduct. They contended that allowing such limitations would essentially enable railroads to operate without any real accountability, creating an unjust situation where shippers bore all risks while receiving no assurance of careful handling from carriers. Furthermore, they pointed out inconsistencies in how these contracts were enforced across different states due to varying interpretations of federal law - a problem they felt could only be resolved through uniform national legislation rather than individual state laws.