In the case of McNeill v. Southern Railway Company, 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Southern Railway Company against a claim made by an employee named McNeill who was injured while working for them. The court found that although McNeill had been injured on the job and could not work as a result, he did not have grounds to sue his employer because at the time of his injury he was engaged in interstate commerce activities which were regulated by federal law rather than state law where he filed his suit. As such, it fell under federal jurisdiction and therefore outside of what could be claimed under North Carolina's Employer Liability Act from which he sought compensation for negligence causing personal injury. This decision set precedent regarding how cases involving injuries sustained during interstate commerce are handled legally.

In the dissenting opinion for McNeill v. Southern Railway Company, it was argued that the plaintiff should not be barred from recovery due to contributory negligence. The dissenting justices believed that there were questions of fact regarding whether or not the deceased had been negligent and if his alleged negligence contributed to his death. They held that these questions should have been left up to a jury rather than decided by a judge as a matter of law. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "assumption of risk," asserting that an employee does not assume all risks inherent in their employment but only those which are known and appreciated. In this case, they felt there was insufficient evidence to conclude definitively that McNeill knew and appreciated the danger he faced when he attempted to board moving train cars at night without adequate lighting or warning signals.