In the case of Norfolk Southern Railroad Company v. Chatman in 1916, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving an injured railroad worker seeking compensation from his employer under Georgia state law. The plaintiff, Mr. Chatman, was injured while working for Norfolk Southern Railroad and sought damages for negligence under Georgia's Employer’s Liability Act which allowed employees to sue their employers directly instead of going through workers' compensation procedures. However, the defendant argued that federal laws should apply since they were engaged in interstate commerce at the time of injury. The court held that although railroads are instruments of interstate commerce and generally subject to federal regulation, they are also subject to state regulations when it comes to safety measures unless those contradict or interfere with federal legislation. In this case, there was no conflict between state and federal laws as both aimed at promoting employee safety; hence Georgia's Employer’s Liability Act could be applied without infringing upon any existing Federal statute. Therefore, Mr.Chatman had a right to seek redress under Georgian law despite being involved in interstate commerce during his employment period with Norfolk Southern Railroad Company.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Norfolk Southern Railroad Company v. Chatman argued that the court majority had erred in their interpretation and application of legal principles regarding negligence and liability. The dissent contended that there was sufficient evidence to suggest that the railroad company's employee, who caused injury to Chatman by throwing a switch while he was on a moving train, acted negligently. They believed this negligence should have been enough for liability without needing to prove knowledge or intent on part of the employee or employer. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view about foreseeability as an essential element for determining negligence, arguing instead that it is not always necessary for harm to be foreseeable for someone’s actions to constitute negligent behavior under law.