The Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. International Coal Mining Company case in 1912 revolved around a dispute over freight charges. The International Coal Mining Co., the defendant, had been shipping coal via the Pennsylvania Railroad and was charged according to a tariff filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). However, they believed that they were being overcharged based on an earlier agreement with another railroad company which had since merged with Pennsylvania Railroad. They refused to pay the higher rates and sued for recovery of alleged overpayments. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company stating that once tariffs are filed with ICC, it becomes "the sole judge" of their reasonableness until changed by legal authority or due process under law. Therefore, any prior agreements made before filing cannot alter these tariffs unless approved by ICC itself. This decision reinforced regulatory power of federal agencies like ICC in matters related to interstate commerce.

In the dissenting opinion for Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. International Coal Mining Company, Justice Holmes argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings on similar cases and failed to consider important aspects of contract law. He contended that a railroad company should not be held liable for damages caused by its failure to provide cars when it had made no specific promise or agreement to do so. Furthermore, he pointed out that there were many factors beyond the control of the railroad company which could prevent it from providing cars, such as strikes or equipment failures. Therefore, in his view, holding them responsible would be unfair and unjustified under existing legal principles.