In the case of New York Central Railroad Company v. Mohney, 1919, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company. The dispute arose when a train owned by New York Central collided with a wagon driven by Mr. Mohney at an unguarded railway crossing resulting in his death. His widow sued for damages arguing that it was due to negligence on part of the railroad company as they failed to provide sufficient warning or safeguards at this particular crossing point which was frequently used by public traffic and had been previously identified as dangerous. The court held that while railroads have a duty to maintain safe crossings, they are not insurers against all accidents occurring thereon; their obligation is fulfilled when reasonable care has been taken under circumstances presented - considering location, amount and kind of travel etc., over such crossings. In this case, evidence showed that whistle signals were given before reaching crossing but unfortunately weren't heard due to wind direction. Therefore, since no specific act or omission constituting negligence could be pointed out against them (like failure in giving required signals), nor any statutory violation proved; hence liability couldn't be imposed upon them merely because accident happened at one of their grade crossings.

The dissenting opinion in the case of New York Central Railroad Company v. Mohney argued that the majority's decision to hold a corporation criminally liable for an employee's actions was fundamentally flawed. The dissenters believed that corporations, as artificial entities, could not form criminal intent and therefore should not be held accountable for crimes committed by their employees unless it can be proven that those at the top specifically directed or authorized such behavior. They contended that this ruling would unfairly punish shareholders who had no knowledge or control over individual employees' actions and warned it could have far-reaching implications on corporate law and business practices.