In Missouri Pacific Railway Company v. Humes, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a railroad company could be held liable for damages caused by a train accident. The plaintiff, Humes, was injured when a train operated by the defendant, Missouri Pacific Railway Company, collided with a wagon he was driving. Humes sued the railroad company for damages, claiming that the company was negligent in its operation of the train. The Supreme Court held that the railroad company was liable for the damages caused by the accident. The Court reasoned that the railroad company had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of its trains, and that it had breached this duty by failing to take proper precautions to avoid the accident. The Court also held that the railroad company was liable for the damages caused by the accident, even though the accident was caused by the negligence of the wagon driver. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the Missouri Pacific Railway Company was liable for the damages caused by the train accident. The Court reasoned that the railroad company had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of its trains, and that it had breached this duty by failing to take proper precautions to avoid the accident.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Missouri Pacific Railway Company v. Humes, arguing that the majority's decision was wrongfully decided and should be reversed. He argued that under common law, a carrier of goods is liable for any damage to those goods caused by its negligence or failure to exercise due care while transporting them. In this case, he believed there was sufficient evidence presented at trial to show that the railway company had been negligent in failing to properly secure and protect Humes' property from theft during transport; thus it should have been held responsible for damages resulting from such negligence. Furthermore, Justice Field noted that even if no actual negligence could be proven on behalf of the railroad company, they were still liable under an implied warranty of safe carriage which applied regardless of fault or lack thereof on their part. Therefore he concluded that based upon these facts and applicable legal precedent, judgment should have been entered against Missouri Pacific Railway Company instead of being dismissed as it had been by the majority opinion.