In the case of New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company v. Tonsellito, 1916, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company. The plaintiff was a child who had been injured while playing on one of the defendant's parked freight cars and sought damages for negligence. However, it was established that there were no employees present at the time to prevent such incidents from happening or to foresee any potential danger posed by children playing around these areas unsupervised. Therefore, it could not be proven that there was any neglect on part of the railway company as they did not have actual or constructive notice about children being attracted to their premises for play purposes due to lack of supervision or fencing off dangerous areas where trains are kept idle during non-operational hours.

The dissenting opinion in the case of New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company v. Tonsellito argued that the majority's decision to hold a corporation liable for an employee’s actions, even when those actions were not authorized or condoned by management, was unjust and set a dangerous precedent. The dissenting justices believed that this ruling expanded corporate liability beyond reasonable limits and could potentially lead to abuses of power by plaintiffs seeking damages from corporations. They contended that holding a company responsible for every action taken by its employees would be unworkable in practice and unfair in principle, as it would effectively punish companies for acts they did not commit or endorse.