In the case of Norfolk & Western Railroad Co. v. Nemitz et al., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Norfolk & Western Railroad Co, reversing a decision by the Indiana Supreme Court. The dispute arose when an employee of Norfolk & Western was injured on duty and sought compensation under Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). The company argued that it should not be held liable for damages because its negligence did not cause injury to the worker but merely aggravated a pre-existing condition he had, which was unknown to both parties at the time of employment. However, lower courts found in favor of Nemitz based on FELA's provision that employers are responsible if their negligence played any part in causing injuries sustained by employees while performing duties related to work regardless if there were other contributing factors such as pre-existing conditions or diseases. Upon appeal, however, SCOTUS reversed this ruling stating that aggravation alone does not constitute liability under FELA unless employer’s negligent act is deemed substantial enough to have caused harm.

In the dissenting opinion for Norfolk & Western Railroad Co. v. Nemitz, Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established legal principles regarding property rights and trespassing laws. He contended that under common law, landowners have an absolute right to exclude others from their property and any intrusion constitutes a trespass regardless of whether harm is caused or not. The majority's ruling, according to him, effectively eroded this principle by requiring proof of actual damage before a railroad company could be held liable for trespassing on private land with its tracks and trains. This shift in liability standards would unfairly burden landowners who may lack resources to prove damages while benefiting powerful corporations like railroads which can easily absorb such costs as part of doing business.