In Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company v. Beckwith, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a railroad company was not liable for damages caused by its negligence in failing to provide adequate safety measures at an unguarded crossing on its tracks. The plaintiff, Mr. Beckwith, had been injured when his wagon collided with a train at this crossing due to the lack of warning signs or other safeguards provided by the railway company. The court found that while it was true that railroads have a duty to exercise reasonable care in providing safe crossings for travelers using their lines, they are not required to anticipate every possible danger posed by their operations and take steps accordingly; rather, they must only use such precautions as would be expected from persons of ordinary prudence under similar circumstances. As there were no special dangers present which should have alerted them to install additional safety devices at this particular crossing beyond what is normally done elsewhere, they could not be held liable for any injuries resulting from their failure do so here either

In the dissenting opinion of Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company v. Beckwith, Justice Harlan argued that the majority had failed to consider a key point in their decision: whether or not Congress intended for railroad companies to be held liable for injuries caused by defective equipment when they were operating under federal regulations. He noted that while it was true that Congress had granted railroads certain immunities from liability, these immunities did not extend to cases involving negligence on behalf of the company itself. Furthermore, he argued that if Congress had intended for such immunity to exist then it would have been explicitly stated in either statute or regulation rather than left open-ended as it currently is. In conclusion, Justice Harlan believed that since there was no clear evidence indicating otherwise, railroads should be held responsible for any damages resulting from their own negligence just like any other business entity would be expected to do so under similar circumstances.