In the case of Norfolk & Western Railway Company v. Dixie Tobacco Company, 1912, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a railway company could be held liable for damages caused by a fire that started from sparks emitted by one of its locomotives. The fire had destroyed property owned by the Dixie Tobacco Company. The court ruled in favor of Norfolk & Western Railway Co., stating that there was no negligence on their part as they were operating under normal conditions and took all necessary precautions to prevent such incidents. Therefore, it concluded that accidents which occur despite taking due care do not constitute negligence and hence cannot form grounds for liability.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Norfolk & Western Railway Company v. Dixie Tobacco Company argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and interpretations of the law. The dissent contended that a carrier should not be held liable for damages to goods transported if it can prove that it exercised all necessary care and diligence, even if damage occurred due to an inherent defect or vice in the goods themselves. In this particular case, they believed there was sufficient evidence showing that the railway company had taken appropriate measures to protect tobacco from moisture during transportation, but despite these efforts, some bales were damaged by mold - an inherent risk associated with transporting tobacco. Therefore, according to their interpretation of existing laws and precedents on carriers' liability for cargo damage, they disagreed with holding Norfolk & Western Railway Company responsible for losses suffered by Dixie Tobacco Company.