In the 1931 case of Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. David, Administratrix, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company after it was sued by a widow for her husband's death while he was working on their tracks. The court found that there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove negligence on part of the railroad company and therefore they were not liable for damages. The deceased had been employed as a section hand and his duties included removing loose spikes from ties which had been displaced by passing trains - an inherently dangerous job with known risks associated with it. His wife argued that her husband’s death could have been prevented if only safer tools or methods were used but failed to provide any proof supporting this claim.

In the dissenting opinion for Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. David, it was argued that the court majority had misinterpreted and misapplied federal law in its ruling. The dissenting justices believed that there was no legal basis to hold a railroad company liable for damages caused by an employee's negligence if said employee was not acting within his scope of employment at the time of the incident causing harm or damage. They contended that this interpretation contradicted established principles of agency law, which typically only holds employers responsible for their employees' actions when those actions are performed within their job duties or with explicit authorization from the employer. Furthermore, they disagreed with how causation had been determined in this case, arguing instead that any negligence on part of other employees should have been considered as contributing factors rather than solely attributing fault to one individual's unauthorized acts.