The Morrisdale Coal Company v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company case in 1912 revolved around a dispute over coal transportation rates. The Morrisdale Coal Company sued the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, alleging that the railroad company was charging them unjust and unreasonable rates for transporting their coal to market, which they claimed violated the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887. They sought reparations for what they believed were excessive charges paid under duress. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company stating that while it is true that railroads cannot charge shippers an unreasonable rate, it's also true that shippers must first pay those charges before seeking redress from regulatory authorities or courts if they believe those fees are unfair or discriminatory. Therefore, since Morrisdale had not yet paid its shipping bills at issue here when it filed this lawsuit against Pennsylvania RR Co., its claim for reparations was premature and thus dismissed by court.

In the dissenting opinion for Morrisdale Coal Company v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, it was argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately consider the rights and interests of both parties involved in this case. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant issues with how the contract between these two companies was interpreted by their colleagues on the bench. They felt that a more thorough examination of this agreement would have revealed a different understanding of its terms and conditions, one which favored Morrisdale Coal Company rather than Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Furthermore, they disagreed with their peers' interpretation of relevant state laws pertaining to railroad operations and coal transportation contracts. In particular, they contended that these legal provisions should not be applied in such a way as to unfairly disadvantage or penalize one party over another without clear justification or compelling reason for doing so.