The Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad Company brought a case against James Stimpson to the Supreme Court. The company argued that they had an agreement with Stimpson, in which he was to be paid for his services as a conductor on their railroad line. However, when it came time for payment, Stimpson refused to accept anything less than what he believed he was owed according to the contract. The company then sued him for breach of contract and sought damages from him. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the railroad company, finding that there had been a valid agreement between them and Stimpson and ordering him to pay all outstanding sums due under its terms.

In the dissenting opinion of The Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad Company vs. James Stimpson, Justice McLean argued that the defendant was not liable for damages caused by a train accident due to his negligence. He believed that under common law, an individual could only be held responsible if they had acted with “willful or wanton” disregard for safety regulations. Since there was no evidence to suggest this in this case, he concluded that it would be unjust to hold the defendant accountable for any resulting injuries or losses suffered by passengers on board the train at the time of impact. Furthermore, Justice McLean noted that since railroad companies are considered public carriers and therefore have a duty of care towards their customers, they should bear responsibility when accidents occur as a result of their own negligence rather than placing blame solely on individuals who may have been involved in some way but did not act recklessly or maliciously.