The Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. Day case in 1958 revolved around a dispute over the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). The plaintiff, Day, was an administrator of a deceased railroad worker's estate who sued the Pennsylvania Railroad Company for negligence under FELA after the worker died from injuries sustained on duty. The main issue at hand was whether or not Ohio state law could limit damages awarded under FELA to only those directly suffered by the injured party and not his dependents or heirs. The Supreme Court ruled that federal law preempts state law in this context; therefore, any limitations imposed by Ohio’s wrongful death statute were irrelevant to claims made under FELA. This decision affirmed that compensation should be provided for loss of earnings extending beyond the decedent's probable life expectancy and include potential support to beneficiaries.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. Day, Administrator argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and failed to adequately consider interstate commerce regulations. The dissenters believed that the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) should be interpreted as a comprehensive statute designed to provide uniform rules for all aspects of liability arising from railroad worker injuries, including procedural matters such as where lawsuits can be filed. They contended that allowing state laws to dictate these procedures would undermine FELA’s purpose by creating inconsistencies across states and potentially burdening interstate railroads with different obligations depending on location. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "concurrent" jurisdiction under FELA, arguing it referred only to federal and state courts having equal authority over cases but not necessarily following their own distinct rules or procedures.