In the case of Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Jones, 1894, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jones. The dispute arose when a train owned by the Pennsylvania Railroad Company struck and killed one of Jones's horses that had wandered onto an unfenced portion of their track. The company argued that they were not liable for damages as it was common practice to leave portions of tracks unfenced in rural areas due to low risk and cost considerations. However, under state law at that time, railroad companies were required to fence their tracks or be held responsible for any damage caused by failure to do so. The court upheld this law stating its purpose was not only about protecting livestock but also ensuring safety on highways which trains crossed frequently. It further stated that even if fencing all parts might cause inconvenience or expense to railroads, public safety should always take precedence over such concerns.

In the dissenting opinion for Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Jones, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and could potentially undermine employers' rights. He contended that while an employer is responsible for providing a safe working environment, they should not be held liable if an employee knowingly accepts risks associated with their job. In this case, he believed that Jones had accepted the risk of injury when he chose to work on moving trains - a task known to be dangerous. Furthermore, Justice Brewer disagreed with the majority's interpretation of negligence law; in his view, it was incorrect to hold companies accountable for injuries resulting from dangers inherent in certain types of employment. He warned against setting a precedent where businesses would bear excessive burdens due to unavoidable occupational hazards.